-»v.  ^   .. 


^M 


.<^SS^^  ^^^r;> 


QH  369  .H63  1874 

Hodge,  Charles,  1797-1878 

What  is  Darwinism? 


C^P-3" 


\ 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 


t.i  'Cu    '''i, 


'fcr, 


^'01 


SEP  S8  1922      * 


CHARLES   HODGE, 

PUINCETON,    N.   J. 


NEW    YORK: 
SCRIBNER,  ARMSTRONG,  AND  COMPANY. 

1874. 


Entered  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  iu  the  year  1874,  by 

SCRIBNEE,  AEMSTRONO,  &   COMPANY, 

in  the  Office  of  the  Librarian  of  Congress,  at  Washington. 


RIVERSIDE,   CAMBRIDGE  : 

STEBEOTTFED    AND    PRINTED    St 

H.    0.   HOCOHTON   AND    COMPANY. 


i( 


'^.^ 


'T^W^¥Wr<ri^' 


COI^TElSrTS. 

— ♦■^ 

PAGE 

Importance  of  the  Question 1 

Different  Theories  as  to  the  Origin  op  the  Universe, 

AND  SPECIALLY  OF  VEGETABLE  AND  AnIMAL  OrGANISMS. 

1.  The  Scriptural  Theory 3 

2.  The  Pantheistic  Theory 7 

3.  The  Epicurean  Theory 10 

4.  The  Doctrine  of  Herbert  Spencer 11 

5.  Hylozoic  Theory 21 

6.  Unscriptural  Forms  of  Theism 22 

Darwin's  Theory 26 

Natural  Selection 31 

Sense  in  which  Darwin  uses  the  Word  Natural  .        .  40 

The  Three  Elements  of  Darwinism 48 

The  Exclusion  of  Design  in  Nature  the  Formative  Idea 

of  Darwin's  Theory 49 

Proof  of  Darwin's  Denial  of  Teleology,  from  his  own 

Writings 53 

Proof  from  the  Expositions  of  his  Theory  by  its  avowed 
Advocates. 

Mr.  Russell  Wallace 64 

Professor  Huxley 72 

Dr.  Biichner 84 

Carl  Vogt 85 

Prof  Haeckel 87 

Strauss 147 

Proof  from  the  Objections  urged  by  the  Opponents  of 
Mr.  Darwin's  Theory. 

Duke  of  Argyll 96 

Agassiz 101 

Professor  Janet          . 105 

M.  Flourens 108 

Rev.  Walter  Mitchell Ill 

Principal  Dawson 119 

Relation  of  Darwinism  to  Religion        ....  125 


iv  CONTENTS. 

Causes  of  the  Aktagonism  between  Science  and  Re- 
ligion       126 

The  Evolution  Theory  contkart  to  Facts  and  to  Scrip- 
ture      141 

Sir  William  Thomson  on  Teleology 165 

Dr.  Asa  Gray 174 

Darwinism  tantamount  to  Atheism 177 


t/ 


WHAT    IS    DARWINISM? 


This  is  a  question  which  needs  an  answer. 
Great  confusion  and  diversity  of  opinion  pre- 
vail as  to  the  real  views  of  the  man  whose 
writings  have  agitated  the  whole  world,  sci- 
entific and  religious.  If  a  man  says  he  is  a 
Darwinian,  many  understand  him  to  avow  him- 
self virtually  an  atheist ;  while  another  under- 
stands him  as  saying  that  he  adopts  some  harm- 
less form  of  the  doctrine  of  evolution.  This  is 
a  great  evil. 

It  is  obviously  useless  to  discuss  any  theory 
until  we  are  agreed  as  to  what  that  theory  is. 
The  question,  therefore,  What  is  Darwinism? 
must  take  precedence  of  all  discussion  of  its 
merits. 

The  great  fact  of  experience  is  that  the  uni- 
verse exists.  The  great  problem  which  has 
ever  pressed  upon  the  human  mind  is  to  ac- 
count for  its  existence.     What  was  its  origin  ? 

To  what  causes  are   the   changes  we  witness 
1 


2  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

around  us  to  be  referred  ?  As  we  are  a  part  of 
the  universe,  these  questions  concern  ourselves. 
What  are  the  origin,  nature,  and  destiny  of 
man  ?  Professor  Huxley  is  right  in  saying, 
"  The  question  of  questions  for  mankind  —  the 
problem  which  underlies  all  others,  and  is 
more  interesting  than  any  other  —  is  the  as- 
certainment of  the  place  which  Man  occupies 
in  nature  and  of  his  relation  to  the  universe  of 
things.  Whence  our  race  has  come,  what  are 
the  limits  of  our  power  over  nature,  and  of 
nature's  power  over  us,  to  what  goal  are  we 
tending,  are  the  problems  which  present  them- 
selves anew  and  with  undiminished  interest  to 
every  man  born  into  the  w^orld."  ^  Mr.  Darwin 
undertakes  to  answer  these  questions.  He 
proposes  a  solution  of  the  problem  which  thus 
deeply  concerns  every  living  man.  Darwinism 
is,  therefore,  a  theory  of  the  universe,  at  least 
so  far  as  the  living  organisms  on  this  earth 
are  concerned.  This  being  the  case,  it  may  be 
well  to  state,  in  few  words,  the  other  prevalent 
theories  on  this  great  subject,  that  the  points 
of  agreement  and  of  difference  between  them 
and  the  views  of  Mr.  Darwin  may  be  the  more 
clearly  seen. 

*  Evidences  of  Man's  Place  in  Nature.  London,  1864,  p.  67. 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  3 

The  Scriptural  Solution  of  the  Problem  of  the 

Universe. 

That  solution  is  stated  in  words  equally  sim- 
ple   and   sublime :    "  In    the    beginning    God 
created  the  heavens  and  the  earth."     We  have 
here,  first,   the  idea  of  God.     The  word  God 
has  in  the  Bible  a  definite  meaning.     It  does  ^ 
not  stand  for  an  abstraction,  for  mere  force,  for 
law  or  ordered  sequence.     God  is  a  spirit,  and 
as  we  are  spirits,  we  know  from  consciousness 
that  God  is,  (1.)  A  Substance;  (2.)  That  He 
is    a   person ;   and,  therefore,  a  self-conscious, 
intelligent,  voluntary  agent.     He    can  say  I ; 
we  can  address  Him  as  Thou ;  we  can  speak  of 
Him  as  He  or  Him.     This  idea  of  God  per- 
vades the  Scriptures.     It  lies  at  the  foundation 
of  natural  religion.     It  is  involved  in  our  relig- 
ious  consciousness.     It   enters  essentially  into 
our  sense  of  moral  obligation.     It  is  inscribed 
ineffiiceably,  in  letters  more  or  less  legible,  on 
the  heart   of  every  human  being.     The  man 
who  is  trying  to  be  an  atheist  is  trying  to  free 
himself  from  the  laws  of  his  being.     He  might 
as  well   try   to  free    himself  from  liability  to 
hunger  or  thirst. 

The  'God  of  the  Bible,  then,  is  a  Spirit,  infi- 


4  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

nite,  eternal,  and  unchangeable  in  his  being, 
wisdom,  power,  holiness,  goodness,  and  truth. 
As  every  theory  must  begin  with  some  pos- 
tulate, this  is  the  grand  postulate  with  which 
the  Bible   begins.      This  is  the  first  point. 

The  second  point  concerns  the  origin  of  the 
universe.  It  is  not  eternal  either  as  to  mat- 
ter or  form.  It  is  not  independent  of  God. 
It  is  not  an  evolution  of  his  being,  or  his  ex- 
istence form.  He  is  extramundane  as  well  as 
antemundane.  The  universe  owes  its  exist- 
ence to  his  will. 

Thirdly,  as  to  the  nature  of  the  universe ; 
it  is  not  a  mere  phenomenon.  It  is  an  entity, 
having  real  objective  existence,  or  actuality. 
This  implies  that  matter  is  a  substance  en- 
dowed with  certain  properties,  in  virtue  of 
which  it  is  capable  of  acting  and  of  being 
acted  upon.  These  properties  being  uniform 
and  constant,  are  physical  laws  to  which,  as 
their  proximate  causes,  all  the  phenomena  of 
nature  are  to  be  referred. 

Fourthly,  although  God  is  extramundane. 
He  is  nevertheless  everywhere  present.  That 
presence  is  not  only  a  presence  of  essence, 
but  also  of  knowledge  and  power.  He  up- 
holds  all    things.      He    controls    all    physical 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  5 

causes,  working  through  them,  with  them,  and 
without  them,  as  He  sees  fit.  As  we,  in  our 
hmited  spheres,  can  use  physical  causes  to  ac- 
compHsh  our  purposes,  so  God  everywhere 
and  always  cooperates  with  them  to  accom- 
plish his  infinitely  wise  and  merciful  designs. 

Fifthly,  man  a  part  of  the  universe,  is,  ac- 
cording to  the  Scriptures,  as  concerns  his  body, 
of  the  earth.  So  far,  he  belongs  to  the  ani- 
mal kingdom.  As  to  his  soul,  he  is  a  child  of 
God,  who  is  declared  to  be  the  Father  of  the 
spirits  of  all  men.  God  is  a  spirit,  and  we  are 
spirits.  We  are,  therefore,  of  the  same  nature 
with  God.  We  are  God-like  ;  so  that  in  know- 
ing ourselves  we  know  God.  No  man  con- 
scious of  his  manhood  can  be  ignorant  of  his 
relationship  to  God  as  his  Father. 

The  truth  of  this  theory  of  the  universe 
rests,  in  the  first  place,  so  far  as  it  has  been 
correctly  stated,  on  the  infalhble  authority  of 
the  Word  of  God.  In  the  second  place,  it  is 
a  satisfactory  solution  of  the  problem  to  be 
solved,  —  (1.)  It  accounts  for  the  origin  of  the 
universe.  (2.)  It  accounts  for  all  the  universe 
contains,  and  gives  a  satisfactory  explanation 
of  the  marvellous  contrivances  which  abound  in 
living  organisms,  of  the  adaptations  of  these  or- 


6  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

g-anisms  to  conditions  external  to  themselves, 
and  for  those  provisions  for  the  future,  which 
on  any  other  assumption  are  utterly  inexplica- 
ble. (3.)  It  is  in  conflict  with  no  truth  of  reason 
and  Avith  no  fact  of  experience.^  (4.)  The  Scrip- 
tural doctrine  accounts  for  the  spiritual  nature 
of  man,  and  meets  all  his  spiritual  necessities. 
It  gives  him  an  olDJect  of  adoration,  love,  and 
confidence.     It  reveals  the  Being  on  whom  his 

^  The  two  facts  wliioli  are  commonly  urged  as  inconsistent 
with  Theism,  are  the  existence  of  misery  in  the  world,  and  the 
occmTence  of  undeveloped  or  useless  organs,  as  teeth  in  the  jaws 
of  the  whale  and  mammae  on  the  breast  of  a  man.  As  to  the 
former  objection,  sin,  which  is  the  only  real  evil,  is  accounted 
for  bv  the  voluntary  apostasy  of  man  ;  and  as  to  undeveloped  or- 
trans  they  are  regarded  as  evidences  of  the  great  plan  of  struc- 
ture which  can  be  traced  in  the  different  orders  of  animals. 
These  unused  organs  were  —  says  Professor  Joseph  Le  Conte,  in 
his  interesting  volume  on  Religion  and  Science,  New  York, 
1874,  p.  54  —  regarded  as  blunders  in  natm-e,  until  it  was 
discovered  that  use  is  not  the  only  end  of  design.  "By  fur- 
ther patient  study  of  nature,"  he  says,  "  came  the  recognition  of 
another  law  beside  use,  —  a  law  of  order  underlying  and  condi- 
tioning the  law  of  use.  Organisms  are,  indeed,  contrived  for 
use,  but  according  to  a  preordained  plan  of  structure,  which 
must  not  be  violated."  It  is  of  little  moment  whether  this  ex- 
planation be  considered  satisfactory  or  not.  It  would  certainly 
be  irrational  to  refuse  to  believe  that  the  eye  was  made  for  the 
purpose  of  vision,  because  we  cannot  tell  why  a  man  has  mam- 
mae. A  man  might  as  well  refuse  to  admit  that  there  is  any 
meaning  in  all  the  writings  of  Plato,  because  there  is  a  sentence 
in  them  which  he  cannot  understand. 


WHAT  IS   DARWINISMS  7 

indestructible  sense  of  responsibility  terminates. 
The  truth  of  this  doctrine,  therefore,  rests  not 
only  on  the  authority  of  the  Scriptures,  but  on 
the  very  constitution  of  our  nature.  •  The  Bi- 
ble has  little  charity  for  those  who  reject  it. 
It  pronounces  them  to  be  either  derationalized 
or  demoralized,  or  both. 

The  Pantheistic  Theory. 
This  has  been  one  of  the  most  widely  dif- 
fused and  persistent  forms  of  human  thought 
on  this  whole  subject.  It  has  been  for  thou- 
sands of  years  not  only  the  philosophy,  but  the 
religion  of  India,  and,  to  a  great  extent,  of 
China.  It  underlies  all  the  forms  of  Greek 
philosophy.  It  crept  into  the  Church,  con- 
cealed under  the  disguise  of  Scriptural  termi- 
nology, in  the  form  of  Neo-Platonism.  It  was 
constantly  reappearing  during  the  Middle  Ages, 
sometimes  in  a  philosophical,  and  sometimes  a 
mystical  form.  It  was  revived  by  Spinoza  in 
the  seventeenth  century,  and  subsequently  be- 
came dominant  in  the  philosophy  and  literature 
of  Europe.  It  is  coming  up  again.  Some  dis- 
tinguished naturalists  are  swinging  round  from 
one  pole  to  the  opposite ;  from  saying  there  is 
no  God,  to  -teaching  that  everything  is   God. 


8  WHAT  IS   DARWINISM? 

Sometimes,  one  and  the  same  book  in  one 
half  teaches  materiahsm,  in  the  other  half 
idealism  :  the  one  affirming  that  everything  is 
matter,  the  other  that  matter  is  nothing,  but 
that  everything  is  mind,  and  mind  is  God. 

The  leading  principles  of  the  Pantheistic  the- 
ory are, —  (1.)  That  there  is  an  Infinite  and 
Absolute  Being.  Of  this  Being  nothing  can 
be  affirmed  but  actuality.  It  is  denied  that  it 
is  conscious,  intelligent,  or  voluntary.  (2.)  It 
is  subject  to  the  blind  necessity  of  self-evolu- 
tion or  development.  (3.)  This  development 
being  necessary  is  constant ;  from  everlasting 
to  everlasting.  According  to  the  Braminical 
doctrine,  indeed,  there  are  successive  cycles  of 
activity  and  repose,  each  cycle  being  measured 
by  countless  milliards  of  centuries.  According 
to  the  moderns,  self-evolution  being  necessary, 
there  can  be  no  repose,  so  that  Ohne  Welt  kein 
Gott.  (4.)  The  Finite  is,  therefore,  the  exist- 
ence form  of  the  Infinite ;  all  that  is  in  the 
latter  for  the  time  being  is  in  the  former. 
All  that  is  possible  is  actual.  (5.)  The  Finite 
is  the  Infinite,  or,  to  use  theistic  language,  the 
World  is  God,  in  the  sense  that  all  the  world 
is  and  contains  is  the  form  in  which  God,  at 
each  successive  moment,  exists.     There  is  no 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  9 

power,  save  only  the  power  manifested  in  the 
world ;  no  consciousness,  intelligence,  or  volun- 
tary activity,  but  in  finite  things,  and  the  ag- 
gregate  of  these   is  the  power,  consciousness, 
intelligence,  and   activity  of  God.     What  we 
call  sin  is  as  much  a  forna  of  God's  activity  as 
what  we  call  virtue.     In  other  words,  there  is  i 
no  such  thing  as  free  agency  in  man,  no  such 
thing  as  sin  or  responsibility.     When  a  man 
dies  he  sinks  into  the  abyss  of  being  as  a  drop 
of  water  is  lost  in  the  ocean.     (6.)  Man  is  the 
highest  form  of  God's  existence.     God  is  incar- 
nate in  the   human   race.     Strauss  says,  that 
what  the  Church  teaches  of  Christ  is  not  true 
of  any  individual  man,  but  is  true  of  mankind. 
Or,  as  Feuerbach  more  concisely  expresses  it, 
"  Man  alone  is  our  God."     The  blasphemy  of 
some  of  the  German  philosophers  on  this  sub- 
ject is  simply  unutterable.     In  India  we  see 
the  practical  operation  of  this  system  when  it 
takes  hold  on  the  people.     There  the  personi- 
fication of  the   Infinite  as  evil  (the   Goddess 
Kala)  is  the  most  popular  object  of  worshijD. 


10  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

Epicfiirean  Theory. 

Epicurus  assumed  the  existence  of  matter, 
force  and  motion,  —  Stoff  und  Kraft.     He  held 
that  all  space  was  filled  with  molecules  of  mat- 
ter in  a  state  of  rapid  motion  in  every  direc- 
tion.    These  molecules  were  subject  to  gravity 
and  endowed  with  properties  or  forces.     One 
combination  of  molecules  gave  rise  to  unorgan- 
ized matter,  another  to  life,  another  to  mind  ; 
and  from  the  various  combinations,  guided  by 
unintelligent  phj^sical  laws,  all  the  wonderful 
organisms  of  plants  and  animals  have  arisen. 
To  these  combinations  also  all  the  phenomena 
of  life,  instinct,  and  intelligence  in  the  world 
are   to   be    referred.     This    theory    has   been 
adopted  in  our  day  by  a  large  class  of  scien- 
tific men,  especially  in  Germany.     The  mod- 
j  ern  advocates  of  the  theory  are  immeasurably 
1  superior  to   the   ancient   Epicureans   in    their 
,  knowledge  of  astronomy,  botany,  zoology,  and 
\  biology  ;  but  in  their  theory  of  the  universe, 
I  and  in  their  mode  of  accounting  for  all  the 
phenomena  of  life   and  intelligence,  they  are 
precisely  on  the  same  level.     They  have  not 
added  an  idea  to  the  system,  which  has  ever 
been   regarded  as  the    opprobrium  of  human 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  11 

thought.  Biichner,  Moleschott,  Vogt,  hold  that 
matter  is  eternal  and  indestructible  ;  that  mat- 
ter and  force  are  inseparable  :  the  one  cannot 
exist  without  the  other.  What,  it  is  asked,  is 
motion  without  somethino;  movino^  ?  What  is 
electricity  without  an  electrified  body  ?  What 
is  attraction  without  molecules  attracting  each 
other  ?  What  is  contractibility  without  muscu- 
lar fibre,  or  secretion  without  a  secreting  gland  ? 
One  combination  of  molecules  exhibits  the  phe- 
nomena of  life,  another  combination  exhibits 
the  phenomena  of  mind.  All  this  was  taught 
by  the  old  heathen  philosopher  more  than  two 
thousand  years  ago.  That  this  system  denies 
the  existence  of  God,  of  mind  as  a  thinking 
substance  distinct  from  matter,  and  of  the  pos- 
sibility of  the  conscious  existence  of  man  after 
death,  are  not  inferences  drawn  by  opponents, 
but  conclusions  openly  avowed  by  its  advocates. 

Herhert  Spencer  s  New  Philosophy . 

Mr.  Darwin  calls  Spencer  our  "  great  phi- 
losopher." His  is  the  speculating  mind  of  the 
new  school  of  science.  This  gives  to  his  opin- 
ions special  interest,  although  no  one  but  him- 
self is  to  be  held  responsible  for  his  peculiar 
views,  except  so  far  as  others  see  fit  to  avow 


12  WHAT  IS  DARWINISMS 

them.  Mr.  Spencer  postulates  neither  mmd 
nor  matter.  He  begins  with  Force.  Force, 
however,  is  itself  perfectly  inscrutable.  All  we 
know  about  it  is,  that  it  is,  that  it  is  inde- 
structible, and  that  it  is  persistent. 

As  to  the  origin  of  the  universe,  he  says 
there  are  three  possible  suppositions :  1st. 
That  it  is  self-existent.  2d.  That  it  is  self- 
created.  3d.  That  it  is  created  by  an  exter- 
nal agency.^  All  these  he  examines  and  re- 
jects. The  first  is  equivalent  to  Atheism,  by 
which  Spencer  understands  the  doctrine  which 
makes  Space,  Matter,  and  Force  eternal  and  the 
causes  of  all  phenomena.  This,  he  says,  assumes 
the  idea  of  self-existence,  which  is  unthinkable. 
The  second  theory  he  makes  equivalent  to 
Pantheism.  "  The  precipitation  of  vapor," 
he  says,  "  into  cloud,  aids  us  in  forming  a  sym- 
bolic conception  of  a  self-evolved  universe ; " 
but,  he  adds,  "  really  to  conceive  self-creation, 
is  to  conceive  potential  existence  passing  into 
actual  existence  by  some  inherent  necessity, 
which  we  cannot  do."  (p.  32).  The  Theistic 
theory,  he  says,  is  equally  untenable.  "  Who- 
ever agrees    that   the    atheistic   hypothesis  is 

^  First  Principles  of  a  New  System  of  Philosophy.     By  Herbert 
Spencer.     Second  edition.     New  York,  1869,  p.  30. 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  13 

untenable  because  it  involves  the  impossible 
idea  of  self-existence,  must  perforce  admit  that 
the  theistic  hypothesis  is  untenable  if  it  con- 
tains the  same  impossible  idea."  (p.  38).  The 
origin  of  the  universe  is,  therefore,  a  fact 
which  cannot  be  explained.  It  must  have  had 
a  cause ;  and  all  we  know  is  that  its  cause  is 
unknowable  and  inscrutable. 

When  we  turn  to  nature  the  result  is  the 
same.  Everything  is  inscrutable.  All  we 
know  is  that  there  are  certain  appearances, 
and  that  where  there  is  appearance  there  must 
be  something  that  appears.  But  what  that 
something  is,  what  is  the  noumenon  which 
underlies  the  phenomenon,  it  is  impossible  for  • 
us  to  know.  In  nature  we  find  two  orders  of 
phenomena,  or  appearances ;  the  one  objective 
or  external,  the  other  subjective  in  our  con- 
sciousness. There  are  an  Ego  and  a  non- 
Ego,  a  subject  and  object.  These  are  not 
identical.  "  It  is,"  he  says,  "  rigorously  im- 
possible to  conceive  that  our  knowledge  is  a 
knowledge  of  appearances  only,  without  at  the 
same  time  conceiving  a  reality  of  which  they 
are  appearances,  for  appearance  without  real- 
ity is  unthinkable."  (p.  88).  So  far  we  can  go. 
There  is  a  reality  which  is  the  cause  of  phe- 


14  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

nomerica.  Further  than  that,  m  that  direction, 
our  ignorance  is  profound.  He  proves  that 
space  cannot  be  an  entity,  an  attribute,  or 
a  category  of  thought,  or  a  nonentity.  The 
same  is  true  of  time,  of  motion,  of  matter,  of 
electricity,  hght,  magnetism,  etc.,  etc.  They 
all  resolve  themselves  into  appearances  pro- 
duced by  an  unknown  cause. 

As  the  question,  What  is  matter  ?  is  a  crucial 
one,  he  dwells  upon  it  in  various  parts  of  his 
writings.  Newton's  theory  of  ultimate  atoms  ; 
Leibnitz's  doctrine  of  monads  ;  and  the  dynam- 
ic theory  of  Boscovich,  which  makes  matter 
mere  centres  of  force,  are  all  dismissed  as  un- 
thinkable. It  is  not  very  clear  in  what  sense 
that  word  is  to  be  taken.  Sometimes  it  seems 
to  mean,  meaningless  ;  at  others,  self-contra- 
dictory or  absurd  •  at  others,  inconceivable,  i.  e. 
that  of  which  no  conception  or  mental  image 
can  be  formed  ;  at  any  rate,  it  implies  what 
is  unknowable  and  untenable.  The  result  is, 
so  far  as  matter  is  concerned,  that  we  know 
nothing  about  it.  "  Our  conception  of  matter," 
he  says,  "  reduced  to  its  simplest  shape,  is 
that  of  coexistent  positions  that  offer  resist- 
ance, as  contrasted  with  our  conception  of 
space   in  which  the  coexistent   positions  offer 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  15 

110  resistance."  (p.  166).  Resistance,  however, 
is  a  form  of  force ;  and,  therefore,  on  the  fol- 
lowing page,  Spencer  says,  "  that  forces  stand- 
ing in  certain  correlations,  form  the  whole  con- 
tents of  our  idea  of  matter." 

When  we  turn  from  the  objective  to  the 
subjective,  from  the  external  to  the  inward 
world,  the  result  is  still  the  same.  He  agrees 
with  Hume  in  saying  that  the  contents  of  our 
consciousness  is  a  series  of  impressions  and 
ideas.  He  dissents,  however,  from  that  phi- 
losopher, in  saying  that  that  series  is  all  we 
know.  He  admits  that  impressions  necessa- 
rily imply  that  there  is  something  that  is  im- 
pressed. He  starts  the  question,  What  is  it  that 
thinks  ?  and  answers.  We  do  not  know.  (p.  63). 
He  admits  that  the  reality  of  individual  per- 
sonal minds,  the  conviction  of  personal  exist- 
ence is  universal,  and  perhaps  indestructible. 
Nevertheless  that  conviction  cannot  justify  it- 
self at  the  bar  of  reason  ;  nay,  reason  is  found 
to  reject  it.  (p.  65).  Dean  Mansel  says,  that 
consciousness  gives  us  a  knowledge  of  self  as 
a  substance  and  not  merely  of  its  varying 
states.  This,  however,  he  says,  '"'  is  absolutely 
negatived  by  the  laws  of  thought.  The  fun- 
damental  condition  to   all   consciousness,  em- 


16  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

phaticallj  insisted  upon  by  Mr.  Mansel  in 
common  Avith  Sir  William  Hamilton  and  others, 

is  the   antithesis   of  subject  and   object 

What  is  the  corollary  from  this  doctrine,  as 
bearing  on  the  consciousness  of  self?  The 
mental  act  in  which  self  is  known  implies,  like 
every  other  mental  act,  a  perceiving  subject 
and  a  perceived  object.  If,  then,  the  object 
perceived  is  self,  what  is  the  subject  that  per- 
ceives ?  Or  if  it  is  the  true  self  which  thinks, 
what  other  self  can  it  be  that  is  thought  of? 
Clear!}'-,  a  true  cognition  of  self  implies  a  state 
in  which  the  knowing  and  the  known  are  one 
—  in  which  subject  and  object  are  identified; 
and  this  Mr.  Mansel  rightly  holds  to  be  the  an- 
nihilation of  both.  So  that  the  personality  of 
which  each  is  conscious,  and  of  which  the  exist- 
ence is  to  each  a  fact  beyond  all  others  the  most 
certain,  is  yet  a  thing  which  cannot  be  known 
at  all ;  knowledge  of  it  is  forbidden  by  the  very 
nature  of  human  thought."    (pp.  65,  66). 

Mr.  Spencer  does  not  seem  to  expect  that 
any  man  will  be  shaken  in  his  conviction  by 
any  such  argument  as  that.  When  a  man  is 
conscious  of  pain,  he  is  not  to  be  puzzled  by 
telling  him  that  the  pain  is  one  thing  (the  ob- 
ject perceived)  and  the  self  another  thing  (the 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  17 

perceiving  subject).  He  knows  that  the  pain 
is  a  state  of  the  self  of  which  he  is  conscious. 
Consciousness  is  a  form  of  knowledge ;  but 
knowledge  of  necessity  supposes  an  intelligent 
reality  which  knows.  A  philosophy  which  can- 
not be  received  until  men  cease  to  believe  in 
their  own  existence,  must  be  in  extremis. 

Mr.  Spencer's  conclusion  is,  that  the  uni- 
verse —  nature,  or  the  external  world  with 
all  its  marvels  and  perpetual  changes,  —  the 
world  of  consciousness  with  its  ever  varying 
states,  are  impressions  or  phenomena,  due  to 
an  inscrutable,  persistent  force. 

As  to  the  nature  of  this  primal  force  or 
power,  he  quotes  abundantly  and  approvingly 
from  Sir  WiUiam  Hamilton  and  Mr.  Mansel,  to 
prove  that  it  is  unknowable,  inconceivable, 
unthinkable.  He,  however,  difiers  from  those 
distinguished  writers  in  two  points.  While 
admitting  that  we  know  no  more  of  the  first 
cause  than  we  do  of  a  geometrical  figure  which 
is  at  once  a  circle  and  a  square,  yet  we  do 
know  that  it  is  actual.  For  this  conviction  we 
are  not  dependent  on  faith.  In  the  second 
place,  Hamilton  and  Mansel  taught  that  we 
know  that  the  Infinite  cannot  be  a  person, 
self-conscious,  intelligent,  and  voluntary;    yet 


18  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

we  are  forced  by  our  moral  constitution  to  be- 
lieve it  to  be  an  intelligent  person.  This  Mr. 
Spencer  denies.  '•'  Let  those,"  he  says,  "  who 
can,  believe  that  there  is  eternal  war  between 
our  intellectual  faculties  and  our  moral  obli- 
gations. I,  for  one,  admit  of  no  such  radical 
vice  in  the  constitution  of  things."  (p.  108). 
Religion  has  always  erred,  he  asserts,  in  that 
v/hile  it  teaches  that  the  Infinite  Being  can- 
not be  known,  it  insists  on  ascribing  to  it  such 
and  such  attributes,  Avhich  of  course  assumes 
that  so  far  forth  it  is  known.  We  have  no 
right,  ho  contends,  to  ascribe  personality  to  the 
"  Unknown  Reality,"  or  anything  else,  except 
that  it  is  the  cause  of  all  that  we  perceive  or 
experience.  There  may  be  a  mode  of  being, 
as  much  transcending  intelligence  and  will,  as 
these  transcend  mechanical  motion.  To  show 
the  folly  of  referring  to  the  Unknown  the  at- 
tributes of  our  own  spirits,  he  makes  "  the  gro- 
tesque supposition  that  the  tickings  and  other 
movements  of  a  watch  constituted  a  kind  of 
consciousness  ;  and  that  a  watch  possessed  of 
such  a  consciousness,  insisted  on  regarding  the 
watchmaker's  actions  as  determine'd  like  its 
own  by  springs  and  escapements."  (p.  111). 
The  vast  majority  of  men,  instead  of  agreeing 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  19 

with  Mr.  Spencer  in  this  matter,  will  doubtless 
heartily,  each  for  himself,  join  the  German 
philosopher  Jacobi,  in  saying,  "  I  confess  to 
Anthropomorphism  inseparable  from  the  con- 
viction that  man  bears  the  image  of  God ;  and 
maintain  that  besides  this  Anthropomorphism, 
which  has  always  been  called  Theism,  is  noth- 
ing but  Atheism  or  Fetichism."  ^ 

Mr.  Spencer,  therefore,  in  accounting  for  the 
origin  of  the  universe  and  all  its  phenomena, 
physical,  vital,  and  mental,  rejects  Theism,  or 
the  doctrine  of  a  personal  God,  who  is  extra- 
mundane  as  well  as  antemundane,  the  creator 
and  governor  of  all  things  ;  he  rejects  Panthe- 
ism, which  makes  the  finite  the  existence-form 
of  the  Infinite ;  he  rejects  Atheism,  which  he 
understands  to  be  the  doctrine  of*  the  eternity 
and  self-existence  of  matter  and  force.  He 
contents  himself  with  saying  we  must  acknowl- 
edge the  realit}^  of  an  unknown  something 
which  is  the  cause  of  all  things,  —  the  noume- 
non  of  all  phenomena.  "  If  science  and  religion 
are  to  be  reconciled,  the  basis  of  the  reconcilia- 
tion must  be  this  deepest,  widest,  and  most  cer- 
tain of  all  facts,  —  that  the  Power  which  the 

1   Von  den  gottUchen  Dinr/en,  Wei-ke,  III.  pp.  422,  425.    Leipzig, 
181G. 


20  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

universe  manifests  is  utterly  inscrutable."  (p. 
46).  "The  ultimate  of  ultimates  is  Force." 
"  Matter  and  motion,  as  we  know  them,  are 
differently  conditioned  manifestations  of  force." 
"  If,  to  use  an  algebraic  illustration,  we  repre- 
sent Matter,  Motion,  and  Force,  by  the  symbols 
X,  y,  z ;  then  we  may  ascertain  the  values  of  x 
and  y  in  terms  of  z,  but  the  value  of  z  can 
never  be  found ;  z  is  the  unknown  quantity, 
which  must  forever  remain  unknown,  for  the 
obvious  reason  that  there  is  nothing  in  which 
its  value  can  be  expressed."     (pp.  169, 170). 

We  have,  then,  no  God  but  Force.  Atheist  is 
everywhere  regarded  as  a  term  of  reproach. 
Every  man  instinctively  recoils  from  it.  Even 
the  philosophers  of  the  time  of  the  French 
Revolution  repudiated  the  charge  of  atheism, 
because  they  believed  in  motion ;  and  motion 
being  inscrutable,  they  believed  in  an  inscrutable 
something,  i.  e.  in  Force.  We  doubt  not  Mr. 
Spencer  would  indignantly  reject  the  imputation 
of  atheism  ;  nevertheless,  in  the  judgment  of 
most  men,  the  difference  between  Antitheist 
and  Atheist  is  a  mere  matter  of  orthography. 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  21 

Hylozoic  Theory. 

This  theory  assumes  the  universe  to  be  eter- 
nal. There  is  nothing  extra,  or  antemundane. 
There  is  but  one  substance,  and  that  substance 
is  matter.  Matter,  however,  has  an  active 
and  passive  principle.  Life  and  rationality  are 
among  its  attributes  or  functions.  The  uni- 
verse, therefore,  is  a  living  whole  pervaded  by 
a  principle  not  only  of  life  but  of  intelligence. 
This  hylozoic  doctrine,  some  modern  scientific 
men,  as  Professor  Tyndall,  seem  inclined  to 
adopt.  They  tell  us  that  matter  is  not  the 
dead  and  degraded  thing  it  is  commonly  re- 
garded. It  is  active  and  transcendental.  What 
that  means,  we  do  not  know.  The  word  trans- 
cendental is  like  a  parabola,  in  that  there  is  no 
knowing  where  its  meaning  ends.  To  say  that 
matter  is  transcendental,  is  saying  there  is  no 
telling  what  it  is  up  to.  This  habit  of  using 
words  which  have  no  definite  meaning  is  very 
convenient  to  writers,  but  very  much  the  re- 
verse for  readers.  Some  of  the  ancient  Stoics 
distinguished  between  the  active  and  passive 
principles  in  the  world,  calling  the  one  mind, 
the  other,  matter.  These  however  were  as 
intimately  united"  as  matter  and  life  in  a  plant 
or  animal. 


22  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

Theism  in  Unscriptural  Forms. 

There  are  men  who  are  constramed  to  admit 
the  being  of  God,  who  depart  from  the  Scriptural 
doctrine  as  to  his  relation  to  the  world.  Ac- 
cording to  some,  God  created  matter  and  en- 
dowed it  with  certain  properties,  and  then  left 
it  to  itself  to  work  out,  without  any  interfer- 
ence or  control  on  his  part,  all  possible  results. 
According  to  others.  He  created  not  only  matter, 
but  life,  or  living  germs,  one  or  more,  from 
which  without  any  divine  intervention  all  living 
organisms  have  been  developed.  Others,  again, 
refer  not  only  matter  and  life,  but  mind  also  to 
the  act  of  the  Creator ;  but  with  creation  his 
agency  ceases.  He  has  no  more  to  do  with  the 
world,  than  a  ship-builder  has  with  the  ship  he 
has  constructed,  when  it  is  launched  and  far  off 
upon  the  ocean.  According  to  all  these  views 
a  creator  is  a  mere  Deus  ex  machina,  an  assump- 
tion to  account  for  the  origin  of  the  universe. 

Another  general  view  of  God's  relation  to  the 
world  goes  to  the  opposite  extreme.  Instead 
of  God  doing  nothing.  He  does  everything. 
Second  causes  have  no  efficiency.  The  laws  of 
nature  are  said  to  be  the  uniform  modes  of 
divine  operation.   Gravitation  does  not  flow  from 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  23 

the  nature  of  matter,  but  is  a  mode  of  God's 
uniform  efficiency.  What  are  called  chemical 
affinities  are  not  due  to  anything  in  different 
kinds  of  matter,  but  God  always  acts  in  one  way 
in  connection  with  an  acid,  and  in  another  way 
in  connection  with  an  alkali.  If  a  man  places  a 
particle  of  salt  or  sugar  on  his  tongue,  the  sen- 
sation which  he  experiences  is  not  to  be  re- 
ferred to  the  salt  or  sugar,  but  to  God's  agency. 
When  this  theory  is  extended,  as  it  generally 
is  by  its  advocates,  from  the  external  to  the  in- 
ternal world,  the  universe  of  matter  and  mind, 
with  all  their  phenomena,  is  a  constant  effect  of 
the  omnipresent  activity  of  God.  The  minds  of 
some  men,  as  remarked  above,  are  so  consti- 
tuted that  they  can  pass  from  the  theory  that 
God  does  nothing,  to  the  doctrine  that  He  doe3 
everything,  without  seeing  the  difference.  Mr. 
Kussel  Wallace,  the  companion  and  peer  of  Mr. 
Darwin,  devotes  a  large  part  of  his  book  on 
"  Natural  Selection,"  to  prove  that  the  organs 
of  plants  and  animals  are  formed  by  blind  physi- 
cal causes.  Toward  the  close  of  the  volume  he 
teaches  that  there  are  no  such  causes.  He  asks 
the  question.  What  is  Matter?  and  answers. 
Nothing.  We  know,  he  says,  nothing  but  force  ; 
and  as   the  only  force  of  which  we  have  any 


24  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

immediate  knowledge  is  mind-force,  the  infer- 
ence, is  "  that  the  whole  universe  is  not  merely 
dependent  on,  but  actually  is,  the  will  of  higher 
intelligences,  or  of  one  Supreme  Intelligence/'-^ 
This  is  a  transition  from  virtual  materialism  to 
idealistic  pantheism.  The  effect  of  this  admis- 
sion on  the  part  of  Mr.  Wallace  on  the  theory  of 
natural  selection,  is  what  an  explosion  of  its 
boiler  would  be  to  a  steamer  in  mid-ocean, 
which  should  blow  out  its  deck,  sides,  and  bot- 
tom.    Nothing  would  remain  above  water. 

The  Duke  of  Argyll  seems  at  times  inclined 
to  lapse  into  the  same  doctrine.  "  Science,"  he 
says,  "  in  the  modern  doctrine  of  conservation 
of  energy  and  the  convertibility  of  forces,  is 
already  getting  a  firm  hold  of  the  idea,  that  all 
kinds  of  force  are  but  forms  of  manifestations 
of  one  central  force  issuing  from  some  one 
fountain-head  of  power.  Sir  John  Herschel 
has  not  hesitated  to  say,  '  that  it  is  but  reason- 
able to  regard  the  force  of  gravitation  as  the 
direct  or  indirect  result  of  a  consciousness  or 
will  existing  somewhere.'  And  even  if  we  can- 
not certainly  identify  force  in  all  its  forms  with 
the  direct  energies  of  the  one  Omnipresent  and 

1  The  Theory  of  Natural  Selection.  By  Alfred  Russel  Wal- 
lace.    London,  1870,  p.  368. 


■N 


WHA  T  IS  DA  R  WINISM  f  2  5 

All-pervading  Will,  it  is  at  least  in  the  highest 
degree  unphilosophical  to  assert  the  contrary,  — 
to  think  or  to  speak,  as  if  the  forces  of  nature 
were  either  independent  of,  or  even  separate 
from  the  Creator's  power."  ^  The  Duke,  how- 
ever, in  the  general  tenor  of  his  book,  does  not 
differ  from  the  common  doctrine,  except  in  one 
point.  He  does  not  deny  the  efficiency  of 
physical  causes,  or  resolve  them  all  into  the 
efficiency  of  God ;  but  he  teaches  that  God,  in 
this  world  at  least,  never  acts  except  through 
those  causes.  He  applies  this  doctrine  even  to 
miracles,  which  he  regards  as  effects  produced 
by  second  causes  of  which  we  are  ignorant, 
that  is,  by  some  higher  law  of  nature.  The 
Scriptures,  however,  teach  that  God  is  not 
thus  bound ;  that  He  operates  through  second 
causes,  with  them,  or  without  them,  as  He  sees 
fit.  It  is  a  purely  arbitrary  assumption,  that 
when  Christ  raised,  the  dead,  healed  the  lepers, 
or  gave  sight  to  the  blind,  any  second  cause 
intervened  between  the  effect  and  the  effi- 
ciency of  his  will.  What  physical  law,  or  uni- 
formly acting  force,  operated  to  make  the  axe 
float  at  the  command  of  the  prophet  ?  or,  in 

'^  Reign  of  Law-    By  tlie  Diike  of  Argyle.     Fifth  edition,  Lon- 
don, 1867,  p.  123. 


26  WHAT  IS  DARV/INISM? 

that  greatest  of  all  miracles,  the  original  crea- 
tion of  the  world. 

Mr.  Darwin  s  Theory. 

We  have  not  forgotten  Mr.  Darwin.  It 
seemed  desirable,  in  order  to  understand  his 
theory,  to  see  its  relation  to  other  theories  of 
the  universe  and  its  phenomena,  with  which  it 
is  more  or  less  connected.  His  work  on  the 
"  Origin  of  Species  "  does  not  purport  to  be 
philosophical.  In  this  aspect  it  is  very  differ- 
ent from  the  cognate  works  of  Mr.  Spencer. 
Darwin  does  not  speculate  on  the  origin  of  the 
universe,  on  the  nature  of  matter,  or  of  force. 
He  is  simply  a  naturalist,  a  careful  and  labo- 
rious observer  ;  skillful  in  his  descriptions,  and 
singularly  candid  in  dealing  with  the  difficul- 
ties in  the  way  of  his  peculiar  doctrine.  He 
set  before  himself  a  single  problem,  namely, 
How  are  the  fauna  and  flora  of  our  earth  to  be 
accounted  for  ?  In  the  solution  of  this  prob- 
lem, he  assumes :  — 

1.  The  existence  of  matter,  although  he 
says  little  on  the  subject.  Its  existence  how- 
ever, as  a  real  entity,  is  everywhere  taken  for 
granted. 

2.  He    assumes   the    efficiency   of   physical 


WHAT  JS  DARWINISM?  27 

causes,  showing  no  disposition  to  resolve  them 
into  mind-force,  or  into  the  efficiency  of  the 
First  Cause. 

3.  He  assumes  also  the  existence  of  life  in 
the  form  of  one  or  more  primordial  germs.  He 
does  not  adopt  the  theory  of  spontaneous  gen- 
eration. What  life  is  he  does  not  attempt  to 
explain,  further  than  to  quote  (p.  326),  with 
approbation,  the  definition  of  Herbert  Spen- 
cer, who  says,  "  Life  depends  on,  or  consists 
in,  the  incessant  action  and  reaction  of  vari- 
ous forces,"  —  which  conveys  no  very  definite 
idea. 

4.  To  account  for  the  existence  of  matter 
and  life,  Mr.  Darwin  admits  a  Creator.  This 
is  done  explicitly  and  repeatedly.  Nothing, 
however,  is  said  of  the  nature  of  the  Creator 
and  of  his  relation  to  the  world,  further  than  is 
implied  in  the  meaning  of  the  word. 

5.  From  the  primordial  germ  or  germs  (Mr. 
Darwin  seems  to  have  settled  down  to  the 
assumption  of  only  one  primordial  germ),  all 
living  organisms,  vegetable  and  animal,  includ- 
ing man,  on  our  globe,  through  all  the  stages 
of  its  history,  have  descended. 

6.  As  growth,  organization,  and  reproduction 
are  the  functions  of  physical  life,  as  soon  as 


28  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

the  primordial  germ  began  to  live,  it  began  to 
grow,  to  fashion  organs  however  simple,  for  its 
nourishment  and  increase,  and  for  the  repro- 
duction, in  some  way,  of  living  forms  like  it- 
self. How  all  living  things  on  earth,  including 
the  endless  variety  of  plants,  and  all  the  diver- 
sity of  animals  —  insects,  fishes,  birds,  the 
ichthyosaurus,  the  mastodon,  the  mammoth, 
and  man  —  have  descended  from  the  primor- 
dial animalcule,  he  thinks,  may  be  accounted 
for  by  the  operation  of  the  following  natural 
laws,  viz. :  — 

First,  the  law  of  Heredity,  or  that  by  which 
like  begets  like.  The  offspring  are  like  the 
parent. 

Second,  the  law  of  Variation,  that  is,  while 
the  offspring  are,  in  all  essential  characteristics, 
like  their  immediate  progenitor,  they  never- 
theless vary  more  or  less  within  narrow  limits, 
from  their  parent  and  from  each  other.  Some 
o^  these  variations  are  indifferent,  some  dete- 
riorations, some  improvements,  that  is,  they  are 
such  as  enable  the  plant  or  animal  to  exercise 
its  functions  to  greater  advantage. 

Third,  the  law  of  Over  Production.  All 
plants  and  animals  tend  to  increase  in  a  geo- 
metrical ratio ;  and  therefore   tend  to  overrun 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  29 

enormously  the  means  of  support.  If  all  the 
seeds  of  a  plant,  all  the  spawn  of  a  fish,  were 
to  arrive  at  maturity,  in  a  very  short  time  the 
world  could  not  contain  them.  Hence  of  ne- 
cessity arises  a  struggle  for  life.  Only  a  few 
of  the  myriads  born  can  possibly  live. 

Fourth,  here  comes  in  the  law  of  Natural 
Selection,  or  the  Survival  of  the  Fittest.  That 
is,  if  any  individual  of  a  given  species  of  plant 
or  animal  happens  to  have  a  slight  deviation 
from  the  normal  type,  favorable  to  its  success  in 
the  struggle  for  life,  it  will  survive.  This  vari- 
ation, by  the  law  of  heredity,  will  be  trans- 
mitted to  its  offspring,  and  by  them  again  to 
theirs.  Soon  these  favored  ones  gain  the 
ascendency,  and  the  less  favored  perish ;  and 
the  modification  becomes  established  in  the 
species.  After  a  time  another  and  another  of 
such  favorable  variations  occur,  with  like  re- 
sults. Thus  very  gradually,  great  changes  of 
structure  are  introduced,  and  not  only  species, 
but  genera,  families,  and  orders  in  the  vegeta- 
ble and  animal  world,  are  produced.  Mr.  Dar- 
win says  he  can  set  no  limit  to  the  changes  of 
structure,  habits,  instincts,  and  intelligence, 
which  these  simple  laws  in  the  course  of  mil- 
lions or  milliards  of  centuries  may  bring  into 


30  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

existence.  He  says,  "  we  cannot  comprehend 
what  the  figures  60,000,000  really  imply, 
and  during  this,  or  perhaps  a  longer  roll  of 
years,  the  land  and  waters  have  everywhere 
teemed  with  living  creatures,  all  exposed  to  the 
struggle  for  life,  and  undergoing  change." 
(p.  354).  "  Mr.  Croll,"  he  tells  us,  "  estimates 
that  about  sixty  millions  of  years  have  elapsed 
since  the  Cambrian  period,  but  this,  judging 
from  the  small  amount  of  organic  change  since 
the  commencement  of  the  glacial  period,  seems 
a  very  short  time  for  the  many  and  the  great 
mutations  of  life,  which  have  certainly  oc- 
curred since  the  Cambrian  formation  ;  and  the 
previous  one  hundred  and  forty  million  years 
can  hardly  be  considered  as  sufficient  for  the 
development  of  the  varied  forms  of  life  which 
certainly  existed  toward  the  close  of  the  Cam- 
brian period."  (p.  379).  Years  in  this  con- 
nection have  no  meanins;.  We  misrht  as  well 
try  to  give  the  distance  of  the  fixed  stars  in 
inches.  As  astronomers  are  obliged  to  take 
the  diameter  of  the  earth's  orbit  as  the  unit  of 
space,  so  Darwinians  are  obliged  to  take  a 
geological  cycle  as  their  unit  of  duration. 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  31 

Natural  Selection. 

As  Natural  Selection  which  works  so  slowly 
is  a  main  element  in  Mr.  Darwin's  theory,  it  is 
necessary  to  understand  distinctly  what  he 
means  by  it.  On  this  point  he  leaves  us  no 
room  for  doubt.  On  p.  92,  he  says :  "  This 
preservation  of  favorable  variations,  and  the 
destruction  of  injurious  variations,  I  call  Natu- 
ral Selection,  or,  the  Survival  of  the  Fittest." 
"Owing  to  the  struggle  (for  life)  variations, 
however  slight  and  from  whatever  cause  pro- 
ceeding, if  they  be  in  any  degree  profitable  to 
the  individuals  of  a  species,  in  their  infinitely 
complex  relations  to  other  organic  beings  and 
to  their  physical  conditions  of  life,  will  tend  to 
the  preservation  of  such  individuals,  and  will 
generally  be  inherited  by  their  offspring.  The 
offspring  also  will  th^s  have  a  better  chance  of 
surviving,  for,  of  the  many  individuals  of  any 
species  which  are  periodically  born,  but  a  small 
number  can  survive.  I  have  called  this  prin- 
ciple, by  which  each  slight  variation,  if  useful, 
is  preserved,  by  the  term  Natural  Selection,  in 
order  to  mark  its  relation  to  man's  power  of 
selection.  But  the  expression  often  used  by 
Mr.  Herbert  Spencer  of  the  Survival  of  the  Fit- 


32  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

test,  is  more  accurate,  and  sometimes  is  equal- 
ly convenient."  (p.  72).  "Slow  though  the 
progress  of  selection  may  be,  if  feeble  man  can 
do  so  much  by  artificial  selection,  I  can  see  no 
limit  to  the  amount  of  change,  to  the  beauty 
and  infinite  complexity  of  the  co-adaptations 
between  all  organic  beings,  one  with  another, 
and  with  their  physical  conditions  of  life,  which 
may  be  effected  in  the  long  course  of  time  by 
nature's  power  of  selection,  or  the  survival  of 
the  fittest."  (p.  125).  "It  may  be  objected  that 
if  organic  beings  thus  tend  to  rise  in  the  scale, 
how  is  it  that  throughout  the  world  a  multi- 
tude of  the  lowest  forms  still  exist ;  and  how 
is  it  that  in  each  great  class  some  forms  are 
far  more  highly  developed  than  others?  .... 
On  our  theory  the  continuous  existence  of 
lowly  forms  offers  no  difficulty ;  for  natural 
selection,  or  the  survival  of  the  fittest,  does  not 
necessarily  include  progressive  development, 
it  only  takes  advantage  of  such  variations  as 
arise  and  are  beneficial  to  each  creature  under 

its    complex   relations   of  life Geology 

tells  us  that  some  of  the  lowest  forms,  the  in- 
fusoria and  rhizopods,  have  remained  for  an 
enormous  period  in  nearly  their  present  state." 
(p.  145).     "The  fact  of  little  or  no  modifica- 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  33 

tion  having  been  effected  since  the  glacial  pe- 
riod would  be  of  some  avail  against  those  who 
believe  in  an  innate  and  necessary  law  of  de- 
velopment, but  is  powerless  against  the  doc- 
trine of  natural  selection,  or  the  survival  of 
the  fittest,  which  implies  only  that  variations 
or  individual  differences  of  a  favorable  nature 
occasionally  arise  in  a  few  species  and  are  then 
preserved."    (p.  149) 

This  process  of  improvement  under  the  law 
of  natural  selection  includes  not  only  chaAees 
in  the  organic  structure  of  animals,  but  also  in 
their  instincts  and  intellio;ence.  On  enterino; 
on  this  part  of  his  subject,  Mr.  Darwin  says,  "  I 
would  premise  that  I  have  nothing  to  do  with 
the  origin  of  the  primary  mental  powers,  any 
more  than  I  have  with  that  of  life  itself.  We 
are  concerned  only  with  the  diversities  of  in- 
stinct and  of  other  mental  qualities  within  the 
same  class."  (p.  255)  He  shows  that  even  in 
a  state  of  nature  the  instincts  of  animals  of  the 
same  species  do  in  some  degree  vary,  and  that 
they  are  transmitted  by  inheritance.  A  mas- 
tiff has  imparted  courage  to  a  greyhound,  and 
a  greyhound  has  transmitted  to  a  shepherd-dog 
a  disposition  to  hunt  hares.  Among  sporting 
dogs,   the  young  of  the    pointer   or  retriever 


34  WHAT  IS   DARWINISM f 

have  been  known 'to  point  or  to  retrieve  with- 
out instruction.  "If,"  he  says,  "  it  can  be 
shown  that  instincts  do  vary  ever  so  httle,  then 
I  can  see  no  difficulty  in  natural  selection  pre- 
serving and  continually  accumulating  varia- 
tions of  instinct  to  any  extent  that  was  profita- 
ble. It  is  thus,  as  I  believe,  that  all  the  most 
complex  and  wonderful  instincts  have  arisen." 
(p.  257)  He  was  rather  unguarded  in  saying 
that  he  saw  no  difficulty  in  accounting  for  the 
most  wonderful  instincts  of  animals.  He  ad- 
mits that  he  has  found  very  great  difficulty. 
He  selects  three  cases  which  he  found  it  spe- 
cially hard  to  deal  with  :  that  of  the  cuckoo, 
that  of  the  cell-building  bee,  and  of  the  slave- 
making  ant.  He  devotes  much  space  and 
labor  in  endeavoring  to  show  how  the  instinct 
of  the  bee,  for  example,  in  the  construction  of 
its  cell,  might  have  been  gradually  acquired. 
It  is  clear,  however,  that  he  was  not  able  fully 
to  satisfy  even  his  own  mind ;  for  he  admits 
that  "  it  will  be  thought  that  I  have  an  over- 
weening confidence  in  the  principle  of  natural 
selection,  when  I  do  not  admit  that  such  won- 
derful and  well  established  facts  do  not  anni- 
hilate the  theory."  (p.  290)  This  remark 
was  made  with  special  reference  to  the  instincts 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  35 

of  the  ant,  which  he  finds  very  hard  to  account 
for.  He  adds,  "  No  doubt  many  instincts  of 
very  difficult  explanation  could  be  opposed  to 
the  theory  of  natural  selection :  cases  in  which 
we  cannot  see  how  an  instinct  could  possibly 
have  originated ;  cases  in  which  no  interme- 
diate gradations  are  known  to  exist ;  cases  of 
instinct  of  such  trifling  importance  that  they 
could  hardly  have  been  acted  upon  by  natural 
selection  ;  cases  of  instincts  almost  identically 
the  same  in  animals  so  remote  in  the  scale 
of  nature,  that  we  cannot  account  for  their 
similarity  by  inheritance  from  a  common  pro- 
genitor, and  consequently  cannot  believe  that 
they  were  independently  acquired  through  nat- 
ural selection.  I  will  not  here  enter  on  those 
cases,  but  will  confine  myself  to  one  special 
difficulty  which  at  first  appeared  to  me  insu- 
perable, and  actually  fatal  to  the  whole  theory. 
I  allude  to  neuters,  or  sterile  females  in  insect 
communities ;  for  these  neuters  often  differ 
widely  in  instinct  and  structure  from  both  the 
males  and  the  fertile  females,  and  yet,  from 
being  sterile,  they  cannot  propagate  their 
kind."  (p.  289)  He  is  candid  enough  to  say, 
in  conclusion,  "I  do  not  pretend  that  the  facts 
given  in  this  chapter  (on  instinct)  strengthen 


36  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

in  any  great  degree  mj  theory ;  but  none  of 
the  cases  of  difficulty,  to  the  best  of  my  judg- 
ment, annihilate  it."  (p.  297)  When  it  is  re- 
membered that  his  theory  is,  that  slight  varia- 
tions occurring  in  an  individual  advantageous 
to  it  (not  to  its  associates),  in  the  struggle  for 
life,  is  perpetuated  by  inheritance,  it  is  no 
wonder  that  the  case  of  sterile  ants  gave  him 
so  much  trouble.  Accidental  sterility  is  not 
favorable  to  the  individual,  and  its  being  made 
permanent  by  inheritance,  is  out  of  the  ques- 
tion, for  the  sterile  have  no  descendants.  Yet 
these  sterile  females  are  not  degenerations, 
they  are  in  general  larger  and  more  robust 
than  their  associates. 

We  have  thus  seen  that,  according  to  Mr. 
Darwin,  all  the  infinite  variety  of  structure  in 
plants  and  animals  is  due  to  the  law  of  natural 
selection.  "  On  the  principle  of  natural  selec- 
tion with  divergence  of  character,"  he  says, 
''  it  does  not  seem  incredible  that,  from  some 
such  low  and  intermediate  form,  both  animals 
and  plants  have  been  developed,  and  if  we 
admit  this,  we  must  likewise  admit  that  all  the 
organized  beings  which  have  ever  lived  on  this 
earth  may  be  descended  from  some  one  pri- 
mordial form."    (p.  573)      We  have  seen  also 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  37 

that  he  does  not  confine  his  theory  to  organic 
structure,  but  apphes  it  to  all  the  instincts  and 
all  the  forms  of  intelligence  manifested  by  irra- 
tional creatures.  Nor  does  he  stop  there ;  he 
includes  man  within  the  sweep  of  the  same 
law.  "  In  the  distant  future  I  see  open  fields 
for  far  more  important  researches.  Psychol- 
ogy will  be  based  on  a  new  foundation,  that 
of  the  necessary  acquirement  of  each  mental 
power  and  capacity  by  gradation.  Light  will 
be  thrown  on  the  origin  of  man  and  his  his- 
tory."   (p.  577) 

The  "  distant  future  "  was  near  at  hand.  In 
his  introduction  to  his  work  on  the  "  Descent 
of  Man,"  he  says,  he  had  determined  not  to 
publish  on  that  subject,  "  as  I  thought  that  I 
should  thus  only  add  to  the  prejudices  against 
my  views.  It  seemed  to  me  sufficient  to  indi- 
cate, in  the  first  edition  of  my  '  Origin  of 
Species,'  that  by  this  work  '  light  would  be 
thrown  on  the  origin  of  man  and  his  history ; ' 
and  this  implies  that  man  must  be  included 
with  other  organic  beings  in  any  general  con- 
clusion respecting  his  manner  of  appearance  on 
this  earth.  Now  the  case  wears  a  wholly  dif- 
ferent aspect.  When  a  naturalist  Hke  Carl 
Vogt  (we  shall  see  in  what  follows  what  kind 


3  8  WHA  T  IS  DA  R  WINISM  f 

of  a  witness  he  is)  ventures  to  say  in  his  ad- 
dress as  President  of  the  National  Institution 
of  Geneva  (1869),  '^  Personne,  en  Europe  au 
moins,  n'ose  plus  soutenir  la  creation  indepen- 
dante  et  de  toutes  pieces,  des  especes,'  —  it  is 
manifest  that  at  least  a  large  number  of  natu- 
ralists must  admit  that  species  are  the  modified 
descendants  of  other  species ;  and  this  espe- 
cially holds  good  of  the  younger  and  rising 

naturalists Of  the  older  and  honored 

chiefs  in  natural  science,  many  unfortunately 
are  still  opposed  to  evolution  in  every  form." 
Carl  Vogt  would  not  write  thus.  To  him  no 
man  is  honored  who  does  agree  with  him,  and 
any  man  who  believes  in  God  he  execrates. 

In  1871,  Mr.  Darwin  ventured  on  the  publica-\ 
tion  of  his  "  Descent  of  Man."    In  that  work,  he  i 
endeavors  to  show  that  the  proximate  progeni- 1 
tor  of  man  is  the  ape.     He  says  "  there  is  less  j 
difference  of  structure  between  the  two,  than| 
between  the  higher  and  lower  forms  of  apesj 
themselves."     Not  only  so,  but  he  attempts  to-' 
show  that   the    mental   faculties   of  man   are 
derived   by  slight  variations,  long   continued,: 
from   the   measure    of  intellect    possessed   by 
lower  animals.     He   even  says,  that   there   is 
less  difference  in  intelligence  between  man  and 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  39 

the  higher  mammals,  than  there  is  between  the 
ihtelhgence  of  the  ant  and  that  of  the  coccus, 
insects  of  the  same  class.^ 

In  hke  manner  he  teaches  that  man's  moral 
nature  has  been  evolved  by  slow  degrees  from 
the  social  instincts  common  to  many  animals, 
(pp.  68,  94)  The  moral  element,  thus  de- 
rived, he  admits  might  lead  to  very  different 
lines'  of  conduct.  "  If  men,"  he  says,  "  were 
reared  under  the  same  conditions  as  hives-bees, 
there  can  hardly  be  a  doubt,  that  our  unmar- 
ried females  would,  like  the  worker-bees,  think 
it  a  sacred  duty  to  kill  all  their  brothers,  and 
mothers  would  strive  to  kill  their  fertile  daugh- 
ters ;  and  no  one  would  think  of  interfering, 
(vol.  i.  p.  70) 

"  Lower  animals,  especially  the  dog,  manifest 
love,  reverence,  fidelity,  and  obedience ;  and 
it  is  from  these  elements  that  the  religious 
sentiment  in  man  has  been  slowly  evolved  by 
a  process  of  natural  selection."  (vol.  i.  p.  65) 

The  grand  conclusion  is,  "  man  (body,  soul, 
and  spirit)  is  descended  from  a  hairy  quad- 
ruped, furnished  with  a  tail  and  pointed  ears, 
probably  arboreal  in  its  habits,  and  an  inhab- 

1  Descent  of  Man,  etc.  By  Charles  Darwin,  M.  A.,  F.  R.  S.. 
etc.    New  York,  1871,  vol.  i.  p.  179. 


4 0  WHA  T  IS  DAR  WINl SM ? 

itant  of  the  Old  World."  (vol.  ii.  p.  372)  Mr. 
Darwin  adds  :  •'  He  who  denounces  these  views 
(as  irreligious)  is  bound  to  explain  why  it  is 
more  irreligious  to  explain  the  origin  of  man 
as  a  distinct  species  by  descent  from  some 
lower  form,  through  the  laws  of  variation  and 
natural  selection,  than  to  explain  the  birth  of 
the  individual  through  the  laws  of  ordinary 
reproduction."     (vol.  ii.  p.  378) 

The  Sense  in  which  Mr.  Darwin  uses  the  Word 
''Natural:' 

We  have  not  yet  reached  the  heart  of  Mr. 
Darwin's  theory.  The  main  idea  of  his  sys- 
tem lies  in  the  word  "  natural."  He  uses  that 
word  in  two  senses :  first,  as  antithetical  to  the 
word  artificial.  Men  can  produce  very  marked 
varieties  as  to  structure  and  habits  of  animals. 
This  is  exemplified  in.  the  production  of  the  dif- 
ferent breeds  of  horses,  cattle,  sheep,  and  dogs; 
and  specially,  as  Mr.  Darwin  seems  to  think, 
in  the  case  of  pigeons.  Of  these,  he  says,  "  The 
diversity  of  breeds  is  something  astonishing." 
Some  hiive  long,  and  some  very  short  bills ; 
some  have  large  feet,  some  small ;  some  long 
necks,  others  long  wings  and  tails,  while  others 
have  singularly  short  tails ;   some  have  thirty, 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  41 

and  even  forty,  tail-feathers,  instead  of  the 
normal  number  of  twelve  or  fourteen.  They 
differ  as  much  in  instinct  as  they  do  in  form. 
Some  are  carriers,  some  pouters,  some  tum- 
blers, some  trumpeters ;  and  yet  all  are  de- 
scendants of  the  Rock  Pigeon  which  is  still 
extant.  If,  then,  he  argues,  man,  in  a  com- 
paratively short  time,  has  by  artificial  selection 
produced  all  these  varieties,  what  might  be 
accomplished  on  the  boundless  scale  of  nature, 
during  the  measureless  ages  of  the  geologic 
periods. 

Secondly,  he  uses  the  word  natural  as  anti- 
thetical to  supernatural.  Natural  selection  is ' 
a  selection  made  by  natural  laws,  working  with-, 
out  intention  and  design.  It  is,  therefore,  op- 
posed not  only  to  artificial  selection,  which  is 
made  by  the  wisdom  and  skill  of  man  to  accom- 
plish a  given  purpose,  but  also  to  supernatural 
selection,  which  means  either  a  selection  orig- 
inally intended  by  a  power  higher  than  na- 
ture ;  or  which  is  carried  out  by  such  power. 
In  using  the  expression  Natural  Selection,  Mr. 
Darwin  intends  to  exclude  design,  or  final 
causes.  All  the  changes  in  structure,  instinct, 
or  intelligence,  in  the  plants  or  animals,  includ- 
ing man,  descended  from  the  primordial  germ, 


42  WHAT  IS  DARWINISMS 

or  animalcule,  have  been  brought  about  by  un- 
intelligent physical  causes.  On  this  point  he 
leaves  us  in  no  doubt.  He  defines  nature  to  be 
"  the  aggregate  action  and  product  of  natural 
laws  ;  and  laws  are  the  sequence  of  events  as 
ascertained  by  us."  It  had  been  objected  that 
he  often  uses  teleological  language,  speaking  of 
purpose,  intention,  contrivance,  adaptation,  etc. 
In  answer  to  this  objection,  he  says  :  "It  has 
been  said,  that  I  speak  of  natural  selection  as 
a  power  or  deity ;  but  who  objects  to  an  author 
speaking  of  the  attraction  of  gravity  as  ruling 
the  movoments  of  the  planet?"  He  admits  that 
in  the  literal  sense  of  the  words,  natural  selec- 
tion is  a  false  term  ;  but  "  who  ever  objected  to 
chemists,  speaking  of  the  elective  affinities  of 
various  elements  ?  —  and  yet  an  acid  cannot 
strictly  be  said  to  elect  the  base  with  which  it 
in  preference  combines."  (p.  93)  We  have 
here  an  affirmation  and  a  nescation.  It  is  af- 
firmed  that  natural  selection  is  the  operation 
of  natural  laws,  analogous  to  the  action  of  grav- 
itation and  of  chemical  affinities.  It  is  denied 
that  it  is  a  process  originally  designed,  or 
guided  by  intelligence,  such  as  the  activity 
which  foresees  an  end  and  consciously  selects 
and  controls  the  means  of  its  accomplishment. 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  43 

Artificial  selection,  then,  is  an  intelligent  pro- 
cess ;  natural  selection  is  not. 

There  are  in  the  animal  and  vegetable 
worlds  innumerable  instances  of  at  least  appar- 
ent contrivance,  which  have  excited  the  admi- 
ration of  men  in  all  ages.  There  are  three  ways 
of  accounting  for  them.  The  first  is  the  Scrip- 
tural doctrine,  namely,  that  God  is  a  Spirit,  a 
personal,  self-conscious,  intelligent  agent ;  that 
He  is  is  infinite,  eternal,  and  unchangeable  in 
his  being  and  perfections ;  that  He  is  ever 
present ;  that  this  presence  is  a  presence  of 
knowledge  and  power.  In  the  external  wDrld 
there  is  always  and  everywhere  indisputable 
evidence  of  the  activity  of  two  kinds  of  force  : 
the  one  physical,  the  other  mental.  The  phys- 
ical belongs  to  matter,  and  is  due  to  the  prop- 
erties with  which  it  has  been  endowed  ;  the 
other  is  the  everywhere  present  and  ever  act- 
ingr  mind  of  God.  To  the  latter  are  to  be  re- 
ferred  all  the  manifestations  of  design  in  nat- 
ure, and  the  ordering  of  events  in  Providence. 
This  doctrine  does  not  ignore  the  efficiency  of 
second  causes  ;  it  simply  asserts  that  God  over- 
rules and  controls  them.  Thus  the  Psalmist 
says,  "  I  am  fearfully  and  wonderfully  made. 
.  .  .  My  substance  was  not  hid  from  thee,  when 


44  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

I  was  made  in  secret,  and  curiously  wrought  (or 
embroidered)  in  the  lower  parts  of  the  earth. 
Thine  eyes  did  see  my  substance  yet  being  im- 
perfect ;  and  in  thy  book  all  my  members  were 
written,  which  in  continuance  were  fashioned, 
when  as  yet  there  were  none  of  them."  "  He 
who  fashioned  the  eye,  shall  not  He  see  ?  He 
that  formed  the  ear  shall  not  He  hear?"  "  God 
makes  the  grass  to  grow,  and  herbs  for  the 
children  of  men."  He  sends  rain,  frost,  and 
snow.  He  controls  the  winds  and  the  waves. 
He  determines  the  casting  of  the  lot,  the  flight 
of  an  arrow,  and  the  falling  of  a  sparrow.  This 
universal  and  constant  control  of  God  is  not 
only  one  of  the  most  patent  and  pervading  doc- 
trines of  the  Bible,  but  it  is  one  of  the  funda- 
mental principles  of  even  natural  religion. 

The  second  method  of  accounting  for  contri- 
vances in  nature  admits  that  they  were  fore- 
seen and  purposed  by  God,  and  that  He  en- 
dowed matter  with  forces  which  He  foresaw  and 
intended  should  produce  such  results.  But  here 
his  agency  stops.  He  never  interferes  to  guide 
the  operation  of  physical  causes.  He  does 
nothing  to  control  the  course  of  nature,  or  the 
events  of  history.  On  this  theory  it  may  be 
said,  (1.)  That  it  is  utterly  inconsistent  with  the 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  45 

Scri]3tures.  (2.)  It  does  not  meet  the  relig- 
ious and  moral  necessities  of  our  nature.  It 
renders  prayer  irrational  and  inoperative.  It 
makes  it  vain  for  a  man  in  any  emergency  to 
look  to  God  for  help.  (3.)  It  is  inconsistent 
with  obvious  facts.  We  see  around  us  innu- 
merable evidences  of  the  constant  activity  of 
mind.  This  evidence  of  mind  and  of  its  opera- 
tions, according  to  Lord  Brougham  and  Dr. 
Whewell,  is  far  more  clear  than  that  of  the  ex- 
istence of  matter  and  of  its  forces.  If  one  or 
the  other  is  to  be  denied,  it  is  the  latter  rather 
than  the  former.  Paley  indeed  says,  that  if  the 
construction  of  a  watch  be  an  undeniable  evi- 
dence of  design  it  would  be  a  still  more  wonder- 
ful manifestation  of  skill,  if  a  watch  could  be 
be  made  to  produce  other  watches  ;  and,  it  may 
be  added,  not  only  other  watches,  but  all  kinds 
of  time-pieces  in  endless  variety.  So  it  has 
been  asked,  if  man  can  make  a  telescope,  why 
cannot  God  make  a  telescope  which  produces 
others  like  itself?  This  is  simply  asking, 
whether  matter  can  be  made  to  do  the  work 
of  mind  ?  The  idea  involves  a  contradiction. 
For  a  telescope  to  make  a  telescope,  supposes 
it  to  select  copper  and  zinc  in  due  proportions 
and  fuse  them  into  l)rass ;  to  fashion  that  brass 


46  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

into  inter-entering  tubes ;  to  collect  and  com- 
bine the  requisite  materials  for  the  different 
kinds  of  glass  needed ;  to  melt  them,  grind, 
fashion,  and  polish  them  ;  adjust  their  densities 
and  focal  distances,  etc.,  etc.  A  man  who  can 
believe  that  brass  can  do  all  this,  might  as  well 
believe  in  God.  The  most  credulous  men  in  the 
world  are  unbelievers.  The  great  Napoleon 
could  not  believe  in  Providence  ;  but  he  be- 
lieved in  his  star,  and  in  lucky  and  unlucky 
days. 

.  This  banishing  God  from  the  world  is  simply 
intolerable,  and,  blessed  be  his  name,  impossi- 
ble. An  absent  God  who  does  nothing  is,  to 
us,  no  God.  Christ  brings  God  constantly  near 
to  us.  He  said  to  his  disciples,  "  Consider  the 
ravens,  for  they  neither  sow  nor  reap  ;  which 
have  neither  store-house  nor  barn ;  and  God 
feedeth  them;  how  much  better  are  ye  than 
the  fowls.  And  which  of  you  by  taking 
thought  can  add  to  his  stature  one  cubit  ? 
Consider  the  lilies  how  they  grow  ;  they  toil 
not,  neither  do  they  spin ;  and  yet  I  say  unto 
you  that  Solomon  in  all  his  glory  was  not 
arrayed  like  one  of  these.  If  then  God  so 
clothe  the  grass,  which  is  to-day  in  the  field, 
and  to-morrow  is  cast  into  the  oven  ;  how  much 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  47 

more  will  He  clothe  you,  0  ye  of  little  faith." 
"  And  seek  ye  not  what  ye  shall  eat,  or  what 
ye  shall  drink,  neither  be  ye  of  doubtful  mind. 
For  all  these  things  do  the  nations  of  the  world 
seek  after ;  and  your  Father  knoweth  that  ye 
have  need  of  these  things."  It  may  be  said 
that  Christ  did  not  teach  science.  True,  but 
He  taught  truth ;  and  science,  so  called,  when 
it  comes  in  conflict  with  truth,  is  what  man  is 
when  he  comes  in  conflict  with  God. 

The  advocates  of  these  extreme  opinions  pro- 
test against  being  considered  irreligious.  Her- 
bert Spencer  says,  that  his  doctrine  of  an  in- 
scrutable, unintelligent,  unknown  force,  as  the 
cause  of  all  things,  is  a  much  more  religious 
doctrine  than  that  of  a  personal,  intelligent, 
and  voluntary  Being  of  infinite  power  and 
goodness.  Matthew  Arnold  holds  that  an  un- 
conscious "  power  which  makes  for  right,"  is  a 
higher  idea  of  God  than  the  Jehovah  of  the 
Bible.  Christ  says,  God  is  a  Spirit.  Holbach 
thought  that  he  made  a  great  advance  on  that 
definition,  when  he  said,  God  is  motion. 

The  third  method  of  accounting]!:  for  the  con- 
trivances  manifested  in  the  organs  of  plants 
and  animals,  is  that  which  refers  them  to  the 
blind  operation  of  natural  causes.     They  are 


48  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

not  due  to  the  continued  cooperation  and  con- 
trol of  the  divine  mind,  nor  to  the  original  pur- 
pose of  God  in  the  constitution  of  the  universe. 
This  is  the  doctrine  of  the  Materialists,  and  to 
this  doctrine,  we  are  sorry  to  say,  Mr.  Darwin, 
although  himself  a  theist,  has  given  in  his 
adhesion.  It  is  on  this  account  the  Material- 
ists almost  deify  him. 

^om  what  has  been  said,  it  appears  that 
Darwinism  includes  three  distinct  elements. 
First,  evolution ;  or  the  assumption  that  all 
organic  forms,  vegetable  and  animal,  have 
been  evolved  or  developed  from  one,  or  a  few, 
primordial  living  germs ;  second,  that  this 
evolution  has  been  effected  by  natural  selec- 
tion, or  the  survival  of  the  fittest ;  and  third, 
and  by  far  the  most  important  and  only  dis- 
tinctive element  of  his  theory,  that  this  natural 
selection  is  without  design,  being  conducted 
by  unintelligent  physical  causes.  Neither  the 
first  nor  the  second  of  these  elements  consti- 
tute Darwinism  ;  nor  do  the  two  combined. 
As  to  the  first,  namely,  evolution,  Mr.  Darwin 
himself,  in  the  historical  sketch  prefixed  to  the 
fifth  edition  of  his  "Origin  of  Species,"  says, 
that  Lamarck,  in  1811  and  more  fully  in  1815, 
"  taught  that  all    species,  including  man,  are 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  49 

descended  from  other  species."  He  refers  to 
some  six  or  eight  other  scientists,  as  teaching 
the  same  doctrine.  This  idea  of  Evohition 
was  j)rominently  presented  and  elaborated  in 
the  "  Vestiges  of  Creation,"  first  pubhshed  in 
1844.  Ulrici,  Professor  in  the  University  of 
Halle,  Germany,  in  his  work  "  Gott  mid  die 
Natur,"  says  that  the  doctrine  of  evolution 
took  no  hold  on  the  minds  of  scientific  men, 
but  was  positively  rejected  by  the  most  emi- 
nent physiologists,  among  whom  he  mentions 
J.  Mtiller,  R.  Wagner,  Bischofi*,  Hoffinann,  and 
others.-^  The  Rev.  George  Henslow,  Lecturer 
on  Botany  at  St.  Bartholomew's  Hospital, 
London,  himself  a  pronounced  evolutionist, 
says  the  theories  of  Lamarck  and  of  the  ''  Ves- 
tiges of  Creation  "  have  given  place  to  that 
of  Mr.  Darwin  ;  "  and  there  are  not  wanting 
many  symptoms  of  decay  in  the  acceptance 
even  of  his.  Not  only  has  he  considerably 
modified  his  views  in  later  editions  of  the 
'  Origin  of  Species,'  distinctly  expressing  the 
opinion  that  he  attributed  too  great  influence 
to  natural  selection,  but  even  men  of  science, 
Owen,  Huxley,  —  and  at  least  in  its  application 

1  Gott  und  die  Natur.      Von   D.    Hermann    Ulrici.  Zweite 
Auflage.     Leipzig,  1866,  p.  394. 
4 


50  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

to  man,  Wallace  himself,  —  are  either  opposed 
to  it  in  great  measure,  or  else  give  it  but  a 
qualified  assent.  Thus,  it  has  been  the  fate  of 
all  theories  of  the  development  of  living  things 
to  lapse  into  oblivion.  Evolution  itself,  how- 
ever, will  stand  the  same."  ^  We  find  in  the 
"  Transactions  of  the  Victoria  Institute,"  a  still 
more  decided  repudiation  of  Darwinism  on  the 
part  of  Mr.  Henslow.  He  there  says :  "  I  do 
not  believe  in  Darwin's  theory ;  and  have  en- 
deavored to  refute  it  by  showing  its  utter  im- 
possibility." ^  He  defines  Evolution  by  saying, 
"  It  supposes  all  animals  and  plants  that  exist 
now,  or  have  ever  existed,  to  have  been  pro- 
duced through  laws  of  generation  from  preex- 
isting animals  and  plants  respectively ;  that 
afiinit}^  amongst  organic  beings  implies,  or  is 
due  to  community  of  descent ;  and  that  the 
degree  of  afiinity  between  organisms  is  in  pro- 
portion to  their  nearness  of  generation,  or,  at 
least,  to  the  persistence  of  common  characters, 
they  being  the  products  of  originally  the  same 
parentage."  ^     A   man,  therefore,  may  be    an 

^  The  Theory  of  Evolution  of  Living  Things  and  the  Applica- 
tion of  the  Principles  of  Evolution  to  Religion.  By  Rev.  George 
Henslow,  M.  A.,  F.  L.  S.,  F.  G.  S.     London,  1873,  pp.  27,  28. 

2  Journal  of  the  Transactions  of  the  Victoria  Institute,  or  Philo- 
sophical Society  of  Great  Britain.    Vol.  iv.  London,  1870,  p.  278. 

*  Evolution  and  Religion,  p.  29. 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  51 

evolutionist,  without  being  a  Darwinian.  It 
should  be  motioned  that  Mr.  Henslow  ex- 
pressly excludes  man,  both  as  to  body  and 
soul,  from  the  law  of  evolution. 

Nor  is  the  theory  of  natural  selection  the 
vital  principle  of  Mr.  Darwin's  theory,  unless 
the  word  natural  be  taken  in  a  sense  anti- 
thetical to  supernatural.  In  the  historical 
sketch  just  referred  to,  Mr.  Darwin  not  only 
says  that  he  had  been  anticipate^  in  teaching 
the  doctrine  of  Evolution  by  Lamarck  and  the 
author  of  the  "  Vestiges  of  Creation ;  "  but  that 
the  theory  of  natural  selection,  as  the  means  of 
accounting  for  evolution,  was  not  original  with 
him.  He  tells  us  that  as  early  as  1813,  Dr. 
W.  C.  Wells  "  distinctly  recognizes  the  princi- 
ple of  natural  selection  ;  "  and  that  Mr.  Patrick 
Matthew,  in  1831,  "  gives  precisely  the  same 
view  of  the  origin  of  species  as  that  pro- 
pounded by  Mr.  Wallace  and  myself."  Ideas 
are  like  seed :  they  are  often  cast  forth,  and 
not  finding  a  congenial  soil  produce  no  fruit. 
To  Mr.  Darwin  is  undoubtedly  due  the  elabora- 
tion and  thoroughly  scientific  defence  of  the 
theory  of  natural  selection,  and  to  him  is  to 
be  referred  the  deep  and  widespread  interest 
which  it  has  excited. 


52  WHAT  rS  DARWINISM f 

Darwinism  excludes  Teleology. 

It  is  however  neither  evokition  nor  natural 
selection,  which  give  Darwinism  its  peculiar 
character  and  importance.  It  is  that  Darwin 
rejects  all  teleology,  or  the  doctrine  of  final 
causes.  He  denies  design  in  any  of  the  organ- 
isms in  the  vegetable  or  animal  world.  He 
teaches  that  the  eye  was  formed  without  any 
purpose  of  producing  an  organ  of  vision. 

Although  evidence  on  this  point  has  already 
been  adduced,  yet  as  it  is  often  overlooked, 
at  least  in  this  country,  so  that  many  men 
speak  favorably  of  Mr.  Darwin's  theory,  who 
are  no  more  Darwinians  than  they  are  Mussul- 
mans; and  as  it  is  this  feature  of  his  system 
which  brings  it  into  conflict  not  only  with 
Christianity,  but  with  the  fundamental  prin- 
ciples of  natural  religion,  it  should  be  clearly 
established.  The  sources  of  proof  on  this  point 
are,  —  1st.  Mr.  Darwin's  own  writings.  2d. 
The  expositions  of  his  theory  given  by  its  ad- 
vocates. 3d.  The  character  of  the  objections 
urged  by  its  opponents. 

The  point  to  be  proved  is  that  it  is  the  dis- 
tinctive doctrine  of  Mr.  Darwin,  that  species 
owe  their  origin,  not  to  the  original  intention 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  53 

of  the  divine  mind ;  not  to  special  acts  of 
creation  calling  new  forms  into  existence  at 
certain  epochs  ;  not  to  the  constant  and  every- 
where operative  efficiency  of  God,  guiding  phys- 
ical causes  in  the  production  of  intended  ef- 
fects ;  but  to  the  gradual  accumulation  of  un- 
intended variations  of  structure  and  instinct, 
securing  some  advantage  to  their  subjects. 

Darwin  s  own  Testimony. 

That  such  is  Mr.  Darwin's  doctrine  we  prove 
from  his  own  writings.  And  the  first  proof 
from  that  source  is  found  in  express  declara- 
tions. When  an  idea  pervades  a  book  and 
constitutes  its  character,  detached  passages 
constitute  a  very  small  part  of  the  evidence 
of  its  being  inculcated.  In  the  present  case, 
however,  such  passages  are  sufficient  to  satisfy 
even  those  wdio  have  not  had  occasion  to  read 
Mr.  Darwin's  books.  In  referring  to  the  sim- 
ilarity of  structure  in  animals  of  the  same  class, 
he  says,  "  Nothing  can  be  more  hopeless  than 
to  attempt  to  explain  this  similarity  of  pattern 
in  members  of  the  same  class,  by  utility  or  the 
doctrine  of  final  causes."^ 

On  the  last  page  of  his  work,  he  says :   "  It 

^  OrUjin  of  Species,  p.  517. 


54  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM f 

is  interesting  to  contemplate  a  tangled  bank, 
clothed  with  many  plants  of  many  kinds,  with 
birds  singing  on  the  bushes,  with  various  in- 
sects flitting  about,  and  with  worms  crawling 
through  the  damp  earth,  and  to  reflect  that 
these  elaborately  constructed  forms,  so  difier- 
ent  from  each  other,  and  dependent  on  each 
other  in  so  complex  a  manner,  have  all  been 
produced  by  laws  acting  around  us.  These 
laws,  taken  in  the  largest  sense,  being  growth 
with  reproduction ;  variability  from  the  indi- 
rect and  direct  action  of  the  conditions  of  life, 
and  from  use  and  disuse ;  a  ratio  of  increase 
so  high  as  to  lead  to  a  struggle  for  life,  and  as 
a  consequence  to  natural  selection,  entailing 
divergence  of  character  and  extinction  of  less 
improved  forms.  Thus  from  the  war  of  nature, 
from  famine  and  death,  the  most  exalted  ob- 
ject which  we  are  capable  of  conceiving,  the 
production  of  the  higher  animals  directly  fol- 
lows. There  is  a  grandeur  in  this  view  of  life, 
with  its  several  powers,  having  been  originally 
breathed  by  the  Creator  into  a  few  forms  or 
into  one ;  and  that  whilst  this  planet  has  gone 
cycling  on  according  to  the  fixed  law  of  grav- 
ity, from  so  simple  a  beginning  endless  forms 
most  beautiful  and  most  wonderful  have  been, 
and  are  being  evolved."     (p.  579) 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM f  55 

In  another  of  his  works,  he  asks,  "  Did  He 
(God)  ordain  that  crop  and  tail-feathers  of  the 
jDigeon  should  vary,  in  order  that  the  fancier 
might  make  his  grotesque  pouter  and  fan-tail 
breeds  ?  Did  He  cause  the  frame  and  mental 
qualities  of  the  dog  to  vary,  in  order  that  a 
breed  might  be  formed  of  indomitable  ferocity, 
with  jaws  fitted  to  pin  down  the  bull,  for  man's 
brutal  sport  ?  But  if  we  give  up  the  principle 
in  one  case  ;  if  we  do  not  admit  that  the  varia- 
tions of  the  primeval  dog  were  intentionally 
guided  in  order,  for  instance,  that  the  grey- 
hound, that  perfect  image  of  symmetry  and 
vigor,  might  be  formed  ;  no  shadow  of  reason 
can  be  assigned  for  the  belief  that  variations, 
alike  in  nature  and  the  results  of  the  same 
general  laws,  which  have  been  the  groundwork 
through  natural  selection  of  the  most  perfectly 
adapted  animals  in  the  world,  man  included, 
were  intentionally  and  specially  guided.  How- 
ever much  we  may  wish  it,  we  can  hardly  fol- 
low Professor  Asa  Gray,  in  his  belief  '  that 
variations  have  been  led  along  certain  benefi- 
cial lines,  as  a  stream  is  led  along  useful  lines 
of  irrigation.'  "  ^ 

1  TJie  Variations  of  Anijnals  and  Plants  under  Domestication. 
By  Charles  Darwin,  F.  R.  S.,  etc.  New  York,  18G8,  vol.  ii.  pp. 
515,  516. 


56  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

Variations,  wliicli  by  their  gradual  accumula- 
tion give  rise  to  new  species,  genera,  families, 
and  orders,  are  themselves,  step  by  step, 
accidental.  Mr.  Darwin  somethnes  says  they 
ha|)pen  by  chance  ;  sometimes  he  says  they  hap- 
pen of  necessity ;  at  others  he  says,  "  We  are 
profoundly  ignorant  of  their  causes."  These 
are  only  different  ways  of  saying  that  they  are 
not  intentional.  When  a  man  lets  anything 
fall  from  his  hands,  and  says  it  was  accidental, 
he  does  not  mean  that  it  was  causeless,  he 
only  means  that  it  was  not  intentional.  And 
that  is  precisely  what  Darwin  means  when  he 
says  that  species  arise  out  of  accidental  varia- 
tions. His  whole  book  is  an  argument  against 
teleology.  The  whole  question  is.  How  are  we 
to  account  for  the  innumerable  varieties,  kinds, 
and  genera  of  plants  and  animals,  including 
man  ?  Were  they  intended  ?  or.  Did  they  arise 
from  the  gradual  accumulations  of  uninten- 
tional variations  ?  His  answer  to  these  ques- 
tions is  plain.  On  page  245,  he  says :  "  Noth- 
ing at  first  can  appear  more  difficult  to  believe 
than  that  the  more  complex  organs  and  in- 
stincts have  been  perfected  not  by  means  supe- 
rior to,  though  analogous  with,  human  reason, 
but  by  innumerable  slight  variations,  each  good 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  57 

for  the  individual  possessor.  Nevertheless, 
this  difficulty,  though  appearing  to  our  imag- 
ination^ insuperably  great,  cannot  be  consid- 
ered real,  if  we  admit  the  following  proposi- 
tions, namely,  that  all  parts  of  the  organizations 
and  instincts  offer,  at  least,  individual  differ- 
ences ;  that  there  is  a  struggle  for  existence, 
which  leads  to  the  preservation  of  profitable 
deviations  of  structure  or  instinct ;  and,  lastly, 
that  gradations  in  the  state  of  perfection  of 
each  organ  may  have  existed,  each  good  of  its 
kind."  He  says,  over  and  over,  that  if  beauty 
or  any  variation  of  structure  can  be  shown 
to  be  intended,  it  would  "  annihilate  his  the- 
ory." His  doctrine  is  that  such  unintended 
variations,  which  happen  to  be  useful  in  the 
struggle  for  life,  are  preserved,  on  the  principle 
of  the  survival  of  the  fittest.  He  urges  the 
usual  objections  to  teleology  derived  from  un- 
developed or  useless  organs,  as  web-feet  in  the 
upland  goose  and  frigate-bird,  which  never 
swim. 

What,  however,  perhaps  more  than  anything, 
makes  clear  his  rejection  of  design  is  the  man- 
ner in  which  he  deals  with  the  complicated  or- 

1  "NVliat  can  the  word  "  imagination  "  mean  in  this  sentence, 
if  it  does  not  mean  "  Common  Sense  ?  " 


58  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM  f 

gans  of  j)lants  and  animals.  Why  don't  he  say, 
they  are  the  product  of  the  divine  intelHgence  ? 
If  God  made  them,  it  makes  no  difference,  so 
far  as  the  question  of  design  is  concerned,  how 
He  made  them  :  whether  at  once  or  by  a  pro- 
cess of  evolution.  But  instead  of  referring 
them  to  the  purpose  of  God,  he  laboriously  en- 
deavors to  prove  that  they  may  be  accounted 
for  without  any  design  or  purpose  whatever. 

"  To  suppose,"  he  says,  "  that  the  eye  with 
all  its  inimitable  contrivances  for  adjusting  the 
focus  to  different  distances,  for  admitting  dif- 
ferent degrees  of  light,  and  for  the  correction 
of  spherical  and  chromatic  aberration,  could 
have  been  formed  by  natural  selection,  seems, 
I  freely  confess,  absurd  in  the  highest  degree." 
(p.  222)  Nevertheless  he  attempts  to  explain 
■  the  process.  "  It  is  scarcely  possible,"  he  says, 
"  to  avoid  comparing  the  eye  with  the  telescope. 
We  know  that  this  instrument  has  been  per- 
fected by  the  long  continued  efforts  of  the 
highest  of  huruan  intellects  ;  and  we  naturally 
infer  that  the  eye  has  been  formed  by  a  some- 
what analogous  process.  But  may  not  this  in- 
ference be  presumptuous  ?  Have  we  any  right 
to  assume  that  the  Creator  works  by  intellectual 
powers  like  those  of  man  ?  If  we  must  compare 


WHAT  IS   DARWINISM?  59 

the  eye  to  an  optical  instrument,  we  ought  in 
imagination  to  take  a  thick  layer  of  transparent 
tissue,  with  spaces  filled  with  fluid,  and  with  a 
nerve  sensitive  to  light  beneath,  and  then  sup- 
pose every  part  of  this  layer  to  be  continually 
changing  slowly  in  density,  so  as  to  separate 
into  layers  of  different  densities  and  thicknesses, 
placed  at  different  distances  from  each  other, 
and  with  the  surfaces  of  each  layer  slowly 
changing  in  form.  Further,  we  must  suppose 
that  there  is  a  power  represented  by  natural 
selection,  or  the  survival  of  the  fittest,  always 
intently  watching  each  slight  alteration  in  the 
transparent  layers,  and  carefully  preserving 
each,  which,  under  varied  circumstances,  tends 
to  produce  a  distinct  image.  We  must  sup- 
pose each  new  state  of  the  instrument  to  be 
multiplied  by  the  million ;  each  to  be  preserved 
until  a  better  is  produced,  and  the  old  ones  to 
be  all  destroyed.  In  living  bodies,  variations 
will  cause  the  slight  alterations,  generation  will 
multiply  them  almost  infinitely,  and  natural 
selection  will  pick  out  with  unerring  skill  each 
improvement."^   (p.  226)      "Let  this  process, 

1  Mr.  Darwin's  habit  of  personifying  nature  has  given,  as 
his  friend  Mr.  Wallace  says,  his  readers  a  good  deal  of  trouble. 
He  defines  nature  to  be  the  aggregate  of  physical  forces ;  and  in 


60  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

he    says,  "  go  on  for   millions  of  years,"  and 
we  shall  at  last  have  a  perfect  eye. 

It  would  be  absurd  to  say  anything  disre- 
spectful of  such  a  man  as  Mr.  Darwin,  and 
scarcely  less  absurd  to  indulge  in  any  mere  ex- 
travagance of  language ;  yet  we  are  express- 
ing our  own  experience,  when  we  say  that  we 
regard  Mr.  Darwin's  books  the  best  refutation 
of  Mr.  Darwin's  theory.  He  constantly  shuts 
us  up  to  the  alternative  of  believing  that  the 
eye  is  a  work  of  design  or  the  product  of  the 
unintended  action  of  blind  physical  causes. 
To  any  ordinarily  constituted  mind,  it  is  ab- 
solutely impossible  to  believe  that  it  is  not  a 
work  of  design.  Darwin  himself,  it  is  evi- 
dent, dear  as  his  theory  is,  can  hardly  believe 
it.  "  It  is  indispensable,"  he  sa3^s,  "  to  ar- 
rive at  a  just  conclusion  as  to  the  formation 
of  the  eye,  that  the  reason  should  conquer 
the  imagination  ;  but  I  have  felt  the  difficulty 
far  too  keenly  to  be  surprised  at  any  degree 
of  hesitation  in  extending  the  principle  of 
natural  selection  to  so  startling  an  extent."  (p. 
225) 

the  single  passage  quoted,  he  speaks  of  Natural  Selection  "as 
intently  watching  "  "  picking  out  with  unerring  skill,"  and  "  care- 
fully preserving."  It  is  true,  he  tells  us  this  is  all  to  be  under- 
stood metaphorically. 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  61 

It  will  be  observed  that  every  step  in  his 
account  of  the  formation  of  the  eye  is  an  ar- 
bitrary assumption.  We  must  first  assume  a 
thick  layer  of  tissue  ;  then  that  the  tissue  is 
transparent ;  then  that  it  has  cavities  filled 
with  fluid ;  that  beneath  the  tissue  is  a  nerve 
sensitive  to  light;  then  that  the  fluid  is  con- 
stantly varying  in  density  and  thickness  ;  that 
its  surfaces  are  constantly  changing  their  con- 
tour ;  that  its  different  portions  are  ever  shift- 
ing their  relative  distances;  that  every  favor- 
able change  is  seized  upon  and  rendered  per- 
manent,—  thus  after  millions  of  years  we  may 
get  an  eye  as  perfect  as  that  of  an  eagle.  In 
like  manner  we  may  suppose  a  man  to  sit  down 
to  account  for  the  origin  and  contents  of  the 
Bible,  assuming  as  his  "  working  hypothesis," 
that  it  is  not  the  product  of  mind  either  hu- 
man or  divine,  but  that  it  was  made  by  a  type- 
setting machine  worked  by  steam,  and  picking 
out  type  hap-hazard.  In  this  way  in  a  thou- 
sand years  one  sentence  might  be  produced,  in 
another  thousand  a  second,  and  in  ten  thousand 
more,  the  two  might  get  together  in  the  right 
position.  Thus  in  the  course  of  "  millions  of 
years  "  the  Bible  might  have  been  produced, 
with  all   its  historical  details,  all  its   elevated 


G2  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

truths,  all  its  devout  and  sublime  poetry,  and 
above  all  with  the  delineation  of  the  character 
of  Christ,  the  ISea  tdv  iSei^v,  the  ideal  of  maj- 
esty and  loveliness,  before  which  the  whole 
world,  believing  and  unbelieving,  perforce 
bows  down  in  reverence.  And  when  reason 
has  sufficiently  subdued  the  imagination  to 
admit  all  this,  then  by  the  same  theory  we 
may  account  for  all  the  books  in  all  languages 
in  all  the  libraries  in  the  world.  Thus  we 
should  have  Darwinism  applied  in  the  sphere 
of  literature.  This  is  the  theory  which  we 
are  told  is  to  sweep  away  Christianity  and  the 
Church ! 

Mr.  Darwin  gives  the  same  unsatisfactory 
account  of  the  marvellous  "  contrivances  "  in 
the  vegetable  world.  In  one  species  of  Orchids, 
the  labellum  or  lower  lip  is  hollowed  into  a 
great  bucket  continually  filled  with  water,  se- 
creted from  two  horns  which  stand  above  it ; 
when  the  bucket  is  sufficiently  filled,  the  water 
flows  out  through  a  pipe  or  spout  on  one  side. 
The  bees,  which  crowd  into  the  flower  for  sake 
of  the  nectar,  jostle  each  other,  so  that  some 
fall  into  the  water  ;  and  their  wings  becoming 
wet  they  are  unable  to  fly,  and  are  obliged  to 
crawl  through  the  spout.     In  doing  this  they 


WHAT  IS   DARWINISM?  G3 

come  in  contact  with  the  pollen,  which,  adher- 
ing to  their  backs,  is  carried  off  to  other  flow- 
ers. This  complicated  contrivance  by  which 
the  female  plants  are  fertilized  has,  according 
to  the  theory,  been  brought  about  by  the  slow 
process  of  natural  selection  or  survival  of  the 
fittest. 

Still  more  wonderful  is  the  arrangement  in 
another  species  of  Orchids.  When  the  bee  be- 
gins to  gnaw  the  labellum,  he  unavoidably 
touches  a  tapering  projection,  which,  when 
touched,  transmits  a  vibration  which  ruptures 
a  membrane,  which  sets  free  a  spring  by  which 
a  mass  of  pollen  is  shot,  with  unerring  aim,  over 
the  back  of  the  bee,  who  then  departs  on  his 
errand  of  fertilization. 

A  very  large  class  of  plants  are  fertilized  by 
means  of  insects.  These  flowers  are  beautiful, 
not  for  the  sake  of  beauty,  —  for  that  Mr.  Dar- 
win says  would  annihilate  his  theory,  —  but 
those  which  happen  to  be  beautiful  attract  in- 
sects, and  thus  become  fertilized  and  perpetua- 
ted, while  the  plainer  ones  are  neglected  and 
perish.  So  with  regard  to  birds.  The  females 
are  generally  plain,  because  those  of  bright  col- 
ors are  so  exposed  during  the  period  of  incuba- 
tion that  they  are  destroyed  by  their  enemies. 


G4  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

Ill  like  manner  male  birds  are  usually  adorned 
with  brilliant  plumage.  This  is  accounted  for 
on  the  ground  that  they  are  more  attractive, 
and  thus  they  propagate  their  race,  while  the 
plainer  ones  have  few  or  no  descendants.  Thus 
all  design  is  studiously  and  laboriously  ex- 
cluded from  every  department  of  nature. 

The  preceding  pages  contain  only  a  small 
part  of  the  evidence  furnished  by  Mr.  Darwin's 
own  writings,  that  his  doctrine  involves  the 
denial  of  all  final  causes.  The  whole  drift  of 
his  books  is  to  prove  that  all  the  organs  of 
plants  and  animals,  all  their  instincts  and 
mental  endowments,  may  be  accounted  for  by 
the  blind  operation  of  natural  causes,  without 
any  intention,  purpose,  or  cooperation  of  God. 
This  is  what  Professor  Huxlej^  and  others  call 
"  the  creative  idea,"  to  which  the  widespread 
influence  of  his  writings  is  to  be  refe-rred. 

Testimony  of  the  Advocates  of  the  Theory. 

It  is  time  to  turn  to  the  exposition  of  Dar- 
winism by  its  avowed  advocates,  in  proof  of  the 
assertion  that  it  excludes  all  teleology. 

The  first  of  these  witnesses  is  Mr.  Alfred 
Russel  Wallace,  himself  a  distinguished  natu- 
ralist.    Mr.  Darwin  informs  his  readers  that  as 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  65 

early  as  1844,  he  had  collected  his  material  and 
worked  out  his  theory,  but  had  not  published 
it  to  the  world,  although  it  had  been  commu- 
nicated to  some  of  his  friends.  In  1858  he  re- 
ceived a  memoir  from  Mr.  Wallace,  who  was 
then  studying  the  natural  history  of  the  Malay 
Archipelago.  From  that  memoir  he  learnt  that 
Mr.  Wallace  had  "  arrived  at  almost  exactly  the 
same  conclusions  as  I  (he  himself)  have  on  the 
origin  of  species."  This  led  to  the  publishing 
his  book  on  that  subject  contemporaneously 
with  Mr.  Wallace's  memoir.  There  has  been 
no  jealousy  or  rivalry  between  these  gentle- 
men. Mr.  Wallace  gracefully  acknowledges 
the  priority  of  Mr.  Darwin's  claim,  and  attrib- 
utes to  him  the  credit  of  having  elaborated 
and  sustained  it  in  a  way  to  secure  for  it  uni- 
versal attention.  These  facts  are  mentioned  in 
order  to  show  the  competency  of  Mr.  Wallace 
as  a  witness  as  to  the  true  character  of  Dar- 
winism. 

Mr.  Wallace,  in  "  The  Theory  of  Natural  Se- 
lection," devotes  a  chapter  to  the  consideration 
of  the  objections  urged  by  the  Duke  of  Argyll, 
in  his  work  on  the  "  Reign  of  Law,"  against 
that  theory.  Those  objections  are  principally 
two :   first,  that  design  necessarily  implies  an 


66  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

intelligent  designer ;  and  second,  that  beauty 
not  being  an  advantage  to  its  possessor  in  the 
struggle  for  life,  cannot  be  accounted  for  on  the 
principle  of  the  survival  of  the  fittest.  The 
Duke,  he  says,  maintains  that  contrivance  and 
beauty  indicate  "  the  constant  supervision  and 
interference  of  the  Creator,  and  cannot  possi- 
bly be  explained  by  the  unassisted  action  of 
any  combination  of  laws.  Now,  Mr.  Darwin's 
work,"  he  adds,  "  has  for  its  main  object  to 
show  that  all  the  phenomena  of  living  things 
—  all  their  wonderful  organs  and  complicated 
structures,  their  infinite  variety  of  form,  size, 
and  color,  their  intricate  and  involved  relations 
to  each  other  —  may  have  been  produced  by 
the  action  of  a  few  general  laws  of  the  simplest 
kind,  laws  which  are  in  most  cases  mere  state- 
ments of  admitted  facts."  (p.  265)  Those  laws 
are  those  with  which  we  are  familiar  :  Hered- 
ity, Variations,  Over  Production,  Struggle  for 
Life,  Survival  of  the  Fittest.  "  It  is  probable," 
he  says,  "  that  these  primary  facts  or  laws  are 
but  results  of  the  very  nature  of  life,  and  of 
the  essential  properties  of  organized  and  unor- 
ganized matter.  Mr.  Herbert  Spencer,  in  his 
'  First  Principles '  and  in  his  '  Biology,'  has,  I 
think,  made  us  able  to  understand  how  this  may 


WHAT  IS   DARWINISM f  67 

be ;  but  at  present  we  may  accept  these  simple 
laws,  without  going  further  back,  and  the  ques- 
tion then  is,  Whether  the  variety,  the  harmony, 
the  contrivance,  and  the  beauty  we  perceive, 
can  have  been  produced  by  the  action  of  these 
laws  alone,  or  whether  we  are  required  to  be- 
lieve in  the  incessant  interference  and  direct 
action  of  the  mind  and  will  of  the  Creator."  (p. 
267)  ^  Mr.  Wallace  says,  that  the  Duke  of 
Argyll  maintains  that  God  "  has  personally 
applied  general  laws  to  produce  effects  which 
those  laws  are  not  in  themselves  capable  of 
producing ;  that  the  universe  alone  with  all  its 
laws  intact,  would  be  a  sort  of  chaos,  without 
variety,  without  harmony,  without  design, 
without  beauty ;  that  there  is  not  (and  there- 
fore we  may  presume  that  there  could  not  be) 
any  self-developing  power  in  the  universe.  I 
believe,  on  the  contrary,  that  the  universe  is  so 
constituted  as  to  be  self-regulating ;  that  as 
long  it  contains  life,   the  forms  under  which 

^  The  question  is  not,  as  Mr.  Wallace  says,  "  How  has  the 
Creator  worked  ?  "  but  it  is,  as  he  himself  states,  whether  the 
essential  properties  of  matter  have  alone  worked  out  all  the 
wonders  of  creation  ;  or,  whether  they  are  to  be  referred  to  the 
mind  and  will  of  God.  It  is  worthy  of  remark  how  Messrs. 
Darwin  and  Wallace  refer  to  Mr.  Spencer  as  their  philosopher. 
W^e  have  seen  what  Spencer's  philosophy  is. 


68  WHAT  IS   DARWINISM f 

that  life  is  manifested  have  an  inherent  power 
of  adjustment  to  each  other  and  to  their  sur- 
roundings ;  and  that  this  adjustment  necessarily 
leads  to  the  greatest  amount  of  variety  and 
beauty  and  enjoyment,  because  it  does  depend 
on  general  laws,  and  not  on  a  continual  super- 
vision and  rearrangement  of  details."  (p.  268) 
"  The  strange  springs  and  traps  and  pitfalls 
found  in  the  flowers  of  Orchids,  cannot,"  he 
says,  "  be  necessary  per  se,  since  exactly  the 
same  end  is  gained  in  ten  thousand  other  flowers 
which  do  not  possess  them.  Is  it  not  then  an 
extraordinary  idea,  to  imagine  the  Creator  of 
the  universe  contriving  the  various  complicated 
parts  of  these  flowers,  as  a  mechanic  might 
contrive  an  ingenious  toy  or  a  difficult  puzzle  ? 
Is  it  not  a  more  worthy  conception,  that  they 
are  the  results  of  those  general  laws  which  were 
so  coordinated  at  the  first  introduction  of  life 
upon  the  earth  as  to  result  necessarily  in  the 
utmost  possible  development  of  varied  forms." 
(p.  270)  "  I  for  one,"  he  says,  "  cannot  believe 
that  the  world  would  come  to  chaos  if  left  to 
law  alone If  any  modification  of  struc- 
ture could  be  the  result  of  law,  why  not  all  ? 
If  some  self-aclaptations  should  arise,  why  not 
others  ?     If  any  varieties  of  color,  why  not  all 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  69 

the  varieties  we  see  ?  No  attempt  is  made  to 
explain  this  except  by  reference  to  the  fact 
that  '  purpose  '  and  '  contrivance  '  are  every- 
where visible,  and  by  an  illogical  deduction 
they  could  only  have  arisen  by  the  direct  ac- 
tion of  some  mind,  because  the  direct  action 
of  our  minds  produce  similar  '  contrivances ; ' 
but  it  is  forgotten  that  adaptation,  however 
produced,  must  have  the  appearance  of  de- 
sign." (p.  280)^  After  referring  to  the  fact 
that  florists  and  breeders  can  produce  varieties 
in  plants  and  animals,  so  that,  "  whether  they 
wanted  a  bull-dog  to  torture  another  animal, 
a  greyhound  to  catch  a  hare,  or  a  bloodhound 
to  hunt  down  their  oppressed  fellow-creatures, 
the  required  variations  have  always  appeared," 
he  adds :  "To  be  consistent,  our  opponents 
must  maintain  that  every  one  of  the  variations 
that  have  rendered  possible  the  changes  pro- 
duced by  man,  have  been  determined  at  the 
right  time  and  place  by  the  Creator,  Every 
race  produced  by  the  florist  or  breeder,  the 
dog  or  the  pigeon  fancier,  the  rat-catcher,  the 
sporting  man,  or  the  slave-hunter,  must  have 
been  provided  for  by  varieties  occurring  when 

^  It  is,  therefore,  clear  tbat  design  is  what  Mr.  Darwin  and 
Mr.  Wallace  repudiate. 


70  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM f 

wanted ;  and  as  these  variations  were  never 
withheld,  it  would  prove  that  the  sanction  of  an 
all-wise  and  all  powerful  Being  has  been  given 
to  that  which  the  highest  human  minds  consider 
to  be  trivial,  mean,  or  debasing."  (p.  290)  -^ 

The  Nebular  Hypothesis,  as  propounded  by 
La  Place,  proposed  to  account  for  the  origin  of 
the  universe,  by  a  process  of  evolution  under 
the  control  of  mere  physical  forces.  That 
hypothesis  has,  so  far  as  evolution  is  concerned, 
been  adopted  by  men  who  sincerely  believe 
in  God  and  in  the  Bible.  But  they  hold 
not  only  that  God  created  matter  and  en- 
dowed it  with  its  properties,  but  that  He  de- 
signed the  universe,  and  so  controlled  the 
operation  of  physical  laws  that  they  accom- 
plished his  purpose.  So  there  are  Christian 
men  who  believe  in  the  evolution  of  one  kind 
of  plants  and  animals  out  of  earlier  and  simpler 
forms  j  but  they  believe  that  everything  was 
designed  by  God,  and  that  it  is  due  to  his  pur- 
pose and  power  that  all  the  forms  of  vegetable 
and  animal  life  are  what  they  are.  But  this  is 
not  the  question.     What  Darwin  and  the  ad- 

1  That  God  permits  men  in  the  use  of  the  laws  of  nature  to 
distil  alcohol  and  brew  poisons,  does  not  prove  that  He  approves 
of  drunkenness  or  murder. 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  71 

vocates  of  his  theory  deny,  is  all  design.  The 
organs,  even  the  most  complicated  and  wonder- 
ful, were  not  intended.  They  are  said  to  be 
due  to  the  undirected  and  unintended  opera- 
tion of  physical  laws.  This  is  Mr.  Wallace's 
argument.  He  endeavors  to  show  that  it  is 
unworthy  of  God  that  He  should  be  supposed 
to  have  contrived  the  mechanism  of  the  or- 
chids, as  a  mechanist  contrives  a  curious  puzzle. 
We  recently  heard  Prof  Joseph  Henry,  in 
a  brief  address,  say  substantially :  "  If  I  take 
brass,  gla,'ss,  and  other  materials,  and  fuse 
them,  the  product  is  a  slag.  This  is  what 
physical  laws  do.  If  I  take  those  same  mate- 
riaJis,  and  form  them  into  a  telescope,  that  is 
v/hat  mind  does."  This  is  the  whole  question 
in  a  nutshell.  That  design  implies  an  intelli- 
gent designer,  is  a  self  evident  truth.  Every 
man  believes  it ;  and  no  man  can  practically 
disbelieve  it.  Even  those  naturalists  who 
theoretically  deny  it,  if  they  find  in  a  cave  so 
simple  a  thing  as  a  flint  arrow-head,  are  as 
sure  that  it  was  made  by  a  man  as  they  are 
of  their  own  existence.  And  yet  they  want  us 
to  believe  that  an  eagle's  eye  is  the  product  of 
blind  natural  causes.  No  combination  of  phys- 
ical forces  ever  made  a  ship  or  a  locomotive. 


72  WHAT  IS  DARWINISMf 

It  may,  indeed,  be  said  that  thej  are  dead 
matter,  whereas  plants  and  animals  live.  But 
what  is  life  but  one  form  of  the  organizing 
efficiency  of  God  ? 

Mr.  Wallace  does  not  go  as  far  as  Mr.  Dar- 
win. He  recoils  from  regarding  man  either 
as  to  ho&y  or  soul  as  the  product  of  mere  nat- 
ural causes.  He  insists  that  ^'a  superior  in- 
telligence is  necessary  to  account  for  man."  (p. 
359)  This  of  course  implies  that  the  agency 
of  no  such  higher  intelligence  is  admitted  in 
the  production  of  plants  or  of  animals  lower 
than  man. 

Professor  Huxley. 

The  second  witness  as  to  the  character  of 
Mr.  Darwin's  theory  is  Professor  Huxley.  "We 
have  some  hesitation  in  including  the  name  of 
this  distinguished  naturalist  among  the  advo- 
cates of  Darwinism.^     On  the  one  hand,  in  his 

*  Mr.  Huxley,  if  we  may  judge  from  what  he  says  of  himself, 
is  somewhat  liable  to  be  misunderstood.  He  says  he  was  four- 
teen years  laboring  to  resist  the  charge  of  Positivism  made 
against  the  class  of  scientific  men  to  which  he  belongs.  He  also 
tells  us  in  his  letter  to  Professor  Tyndall,  prefixed  to  his  volume 
of  Lay  Sermons  and  Addresses,  that  the  "  Essay  on  the  Phys- 
ical Basis  of  Life,"  included  in  that  volume,  was  intended  as  a 
protest,  from  the  philosophical  side,  against  what  is  commonly 
called  Materialism.     It  turned  out,  however,  that  the  public  re- 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  73 

Essay  on  the  Origin  of  Species,  printed  in  the 
"  Westminster  Review,"  in  1860,  and  re- 
garded it  as  an  argument  in  favor  of  Materialism.  This  we 
think  was  a  very  natural,  if  not  an  unavoidable  mistake,  on  the 
part  of  the  public.  For  in  that  Essay,  he  says  that  Protoplasm, 
or  the  physical  basis  of  life,  "  is  a  kind  of  matter  common  to  all 
living  beings,  that  the  powers  or  faculties  of  all  kinds  of  living 
matter,  diverse  as  they  may  be  in  degree,  are  substantially  of  the 
same  kind."  Protoplasm  as  far  as  examined  contains  the  four 
elements,  —  carbon,  hydrogen,  oxygen,  and  nitrogen.  These  are 
lifeless  bodies,  "  but  when  bi'ought  together  under  certain  con- 
ditions, they  give  rise  to  the  still  more  complex  body  Protoplasm  ; 
and  this  protoplasm  exhibits  the  phenomena  of  life."  There  is 
no  more  reason,  he  teaches,  for  assuming  the  existence  of  a  mys- 
terious something  called  vitality  to  account  for  vital  phenomena, 
than  there  is  for  the  assumption  of  something  called  Aquasity  to 
account  for  the  phenomena  of  water.  Life  is  said  to  be  "  the 
product  of  a  certain  disposition  of  material  molecules."  The 
matter  of  life  is  "  composed  of  ordinaiy  matter,  differing  from  it 
only  in  the  manner  in  which  its  atoms  are  aggregated.  I  take  it," 
he  says,  "  to  be  demonstrable  that  it  is  utterly  impossible  to  prove 
that  anything  whatever  may  not  be  the  effect  of  a  material  and 
necessary  cause,  and  that  human  logic  is  equally  incompetent  to 
prove  that  any  act  is  really  spontaneous.  A  really  spontaneous 
act  is  one,  which,  by  the  assumption,  has  no  cause  ;  and  the  at- 
tempt to  prove  such  a  negative  as  this,  is  on  the  face  of  the 
matter  absurd.  And  while  it  is  thus  a  philosophical  impossibiUty 
to  demonstrate  that  any  given  phenomenon  is  not  the  effect  of  a 
material  cause,  any  one  who  is  acquainted  with  the  history  of 
science  will  admit  that  its  progress  has,  in  all  ages,  meant,  and 
now  more  than  ever  means,  the  extension  of  what  we  call  mat- 
ter and  causation,  and  the  concomitant  gradual  banishment  from 
all  regions  of  human  thought  of  what  we  call  spirit  and  spon- 
taneity." 


74  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

printed  in  his  "  Lay  Sermons,"  etc.,  in  1870, 
he  saj^s :  "  There  is  no  fault  to  be  found  with 
Mr.  Darwin's  method,  but  it  is  another  thing 
whether  he  has  fulfilled  all  the  conditions  im- 
posed by  that  method.  Is  it  satisfactorily 
proved  that  species  may  ^  be  originated  by  se- 
lection ?  that  none  of  the  phenomena  exhib- 
ited by  species  are  inconsistent  with  the  origin 
of  species  in  this  way  ?  If  these  questions  can 
be  answered  in  the  affirmative,  Mr.  Darwin's 
view  steps  out  of  the  rank  of  hypotheses  into 
that  of  theories ;  but  so  long  as  the  evidence 
at  present  adduced  falls  short  of  enforcing  that 
affirmative,  so  long,  to  our  minds,  the  new 
doctrine  must  be  content  to  remain  among 
the  former,  —  an  extremely  valuable,  and  in 
the  highest  degree  probable,  doctrine ;  indeed, 
the  only  extant  hypothesis  which  is  worth 
anything  in  a  scientific  point  of  view ;  but 
still  a  hypothesis,  and  not  yet  a  theory  of 
species.     After  much  consideration,"  he  adds, 

1  It  cannot  escape  the  attention  of  any  one  that  Mr.  Darwin, 
Mr.  Wallace,  Professor  Huxley,  and  all  the  other  advocates  or 
defenders  of  Darwinism,  do  not  pretend  to  prove  anything  more 
than  that  species  may  be  originated  by  selection,  not  that  there  is 
no  other  satisfactory  account  of  their  origin.  Mr.  Darwin  admits 
that  referring  them  to  the  intention  and  efficiency  of  God,  ac- 
counts for  everything,  but,  he  says,  that  is  not  science. 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  75 

"  and  assuredly  with  no  bias  against  Mr.  Dar- 
win's views,  it  is  our  clear  conviction  that,  as 
the  evidence  now  stands,  it  is  not  absolutely 
proven  that  a  group  of  animals,  having  all  the 
characters  exhibited  by  species  in  Nature,  has 
ever  been  originated  by  selection,  whether 
artificial  or  natural."  ^ 

Again,  in  his  work  on  "  Man's  Place  in  Na- 
ture," he  expresses  himself  much  to  the  same 
effect :  "  A  true  physical  cause  is  admitted  to 
be  such  only  on  one  condition,  that  it  shall  ac- 
count for  all  the  phenomena  which  come  within 
the  range  of  its  operation.  If  it  is  inconsist- 
ent with  any  one  phenomenon  it  must  be  re- 
jected ;  if  it  fails  to  explain  any  one  phenome- 
non it  is  so  far  to  be  suspected,  though  it  may 
have  a  perfect  right  to  provisional  acceptance. 
....  Our  acceptance,  therefore,  of  the  Dar- 
winian hypothesis  must  be  provisional  so  long 
as  one  link  in  the  chain  of  evidence  is  want- 
ing ;  and  so  long  as  all  the  animals  and 
plants  certainly  produced  by  selective  breed- 
ing from  a  common  stock  are  fertile,  and  their 
progeny  are  fertile  one  with  another,  that 
link  will  be  wanting.     For   so   long   selective 

1  Lay  Sermons,  Addresses,  and  Reviews.     By  Thomas  Henry 
Huxley,  LL.  D.,  F.  R.  S.     London,  1870,  p.  323. 


76  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

breeding  will  not  be  proved  to  be  competent 
to  all  that  is  required  if  it  produce  natural 
species."  ^  In  immediate  connection  with  the 
above  passage,  there  is  another  which  throws 
a  clear  light  on  Professor  Huxley's  cosmical 
views.  "  The  whole  analogy  of  natural  opera- 
tions furnish  so  coiqaplete  and  crushing  an 
argument  against  the  intervention  of  any  but 
what  are  called  secondary  causes,  in  the  pro- 
duction of  all  the  phenomena  of  the  universe  ; 
that,  in  view  of  the  intimate  relations  of  man 
and  the  rest  of  the  living  world,  and  between 
the  forces  exerted  by  the  latter  and  all  other 
forces,  I  can  see  no  reason  for  doubting  that 
all  are  coordinate  terms  of  nature's  great  pro- 
gression, from  formless  to  formed,  from  the 
inorganic  to  the  organic,  from  blind  force  to 
conscious  intellect  and  will."  ^ 

^  Evidence  of  Man'' s  Place  in  Nature.    London,  1864,  j?.  107. 

2  Since  writing  the  above  paragraph  our  eye  fell  on  the  follow- 
ing note  on  the  89th  page  of  the  Duke  of  Argyle's  Reign  of  Law, 
which  it  gives  us  pleasure  to  quote.  It  seems  that  a  wi-iter  in  the 
Spectator  had  charged  Professor  Huxley  with  Atheism.  In  the 
number  of  tliat  paper  for  February  10, 1866,  the  Professor  replies: 
"  I  do  not  know  that  I  care  very  much  about  popular  odium,  so 
there  is  no  great  merit,  in  saying  that  if- 1  really  saw  fit  to  deny 
the  existence  of  a  God  I  should  certainly  do  so,  for  the  sake  of 
my  own  intellectual  freedom,  and  be  the  honest  atheist  you  are 
pleased  to  say  I  am.     As  it  happens,  however,  I  cannot  take  this 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  77 

Ought  not  this  to  settle  the  matter  ?  Are  we 
to  give  up  the  Bible  and  all  our  hopes  for  the 
sake  of  an  hypothesis  that  all  living  things, 
including  man,  on  the  face  of  the  earth,  are 
descended  from  a  primordial  animalcule,  by 
natural  selection,  when  such  a  man  as  Huxley, 
who  (as  Voltaire  said  of  the  prophet  Hab- 
bakuk)  is  capable  de  tout,  says  that  it  has  not 
been  proved  that  any  one  species  has  thus 
originated  ? 

But  on  the  other  hand,  while  he  honestly 
admits  that  Darwin's  doctrine  is  a  mere  hy- 
pothesis and  not  a  theory,  he  has  nevertheless 
written  at  least  three  essays  or  reviews  in  its 
exposition  and  vindication.  He  is  freely  re- 
ferred to  on  the  continent  of  Europe,  at  least, 
as  an  ardent  advocate  of  the  doctrine  ;  and  he 
quotes  without  protest  such  designations  of 
himself.  At  any  rate,  as  he  assures  his  readers 
that  he  has  no  bias  against  Mr.  Darwin's  views, 
as  he  has  devoted  much  time  and  attention  to 
the  subject,  and  as  he  is  one  of  the  most  prom- 
position  with  honesty,  inasmuch  as  it  is,  and  always  has  been,  a 
favorite  tenet,  that  Atheism  is  as  absurd,  logically  speaking,  as 
Polytheism."  In  the  same  paper  he  says,  "  The  denying  the 
possibility  of  miracles  seems  to  me  quite  as  unjustifiable  as  spec- 
'alative  Atheism."  How  this  can  be  reconciled  with  the  pas- 
sages quoted  above,  we  are  unable  to  see. 


78  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

inent  naturalists  of  the  age,  there  can  be  no 
question  as  to  his  competency  as  a  witness  as 
to  what  Darwinism  is. 

His  testimony  that  Mr.  Darwin's  doctrine' 
excludes  all  teleology,  or  final  causes,  is  ex- 
plicit. In  his  review  of  the  "  Criticisms  on  the 
Origin  of  Species,"  he  says,  "  that  when  he 
first  read  Mr.  Darwin's  book,  that  which  struck 
him  most  forcibly  was  the  conviction  that  tele- 
ology, as  commonly  understood,  had  received 
its  death-blow  at  Mr.  Darwin's  hands.  For 
the  teleological  argument  runs  thus  :  An  organ 
is  precisely  fitted  to  perform  a  function  or 
purpose  ;  therefore,  it  was  specially  constructed 
to  perform  that  function.  In  Paley's  famous 
illustration,  the  adaptation  of  all  the  parts  of  a 
watch  to  the  function  or  purpose  of  showing 
the  tune,  is  held  to  be  evidence  that  the  watch 
was  specially  contrived  to  that  end ;  on  the 
ground  that  the  only  cause  we  know  of  compe- 
tent to  produce  such  "an  effect  as  a  watch 
which  shall  keep  time,  is  a  contriving  intelli- 
gence adapting  the  means  directly  to  that 
end."  ^  This,  Mr.  Huxley  tells  us,  is  pre- 
cisely what  Darwin  denies  with  reference  to 
the  organs  of  plants   and   animals.     The  eye 

1  Lay  Sermons^  etc.,  p.  330. 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM f  79 

was  not  formed  for  the  purpose  of  seeing,  or 
the  ear  for  hearing.  It  so  happened  that  a 
nerve  became  sensitive  to  hght ;  then  in  course 
^of  time,  it  happened  that  a  transparent  tissue 
came  over  it ;  and  thus  in  "  milhons  of  years  " 
an  eye,  as  we  have  seen  above,  happened 
to  be  formed.  No  such  organ  was  ever  in- 
tended or  designed  by  God  or  man.  "  An  ap- 
paratus," says  Professor  Huxley,  "  thoroughly 
adapted  to  a  particular  purpose,  might  be  the 
result  of  a  method  of  trial  and  error  worked  by 
unintelligent  agents,  as  well  as  by  the  apph- 
cation  of  means  appropriate  to  the  end  by  an 
intelligent  agent."  "  For  the  notion  that  every 
organism  has  been  created  as  it  is  and  launched 
straight  at  a  purpose,  Mr.  Darwin  substitutes 
the  conception  of  something,  which  may  fairly 
be  termed  a  method  of  trial  and  error.  Organ- 
isms vary  incessantly  ;  of  these  variations  the 
few  meet  with  surrounding  conditions  which 
suit  them,  and  thrive ;  the  many  are  unsuited, 
and  become  extinguished."  "  For  the  teleol- 
ogist  an  organism  exists,  because  it  was  made 
for  the  conditions  in  which  it  is  found  ;  for  the 
Darwinian  an  organism  exists,  because,  out  of 
many  of  its  kind,  it  is  the  only  one  which  has 
been  able  to  persist  in  the  conditions  in  which 


80  •  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

it  is  found."  "  If  we  apprehend,"  Huxley  fur- 
ther says,  "  the  spirit  of  the  '  Origin  of  Species ' 
rightly,  then,  nothing  can  be  more  entirely  and 
absolutely  opposed  to  teleology,  as  it  is  com- 
monly understood,  than  the  Darwinian  theory." 
(p.  303) 

It  has  already  been  stated  that  Mr.  Wallace 
does  not  apply  the  doctrine  of  evolution  to 
man ;  neither  does  Mr.  Mivart,  a  distinguished 
naturalist,  who  is  a  member  of  the  Latin 
Church.  The  manner  in  which  Professor  Hux- 
ley speaks  of  these  gentlemen  shows  how 
thoroughly,  in  his  judgment,  Mr.  Darwin  ban- 
ishes God  from  his  works  :  "  Mr.  Wallace  and 
Mr.  Mivart  are  as  stout  evolutionists  as  Mr. 
Darwin  himself;  but  Mr.  Wallace  denies  that 
man  can  have  been  evolved  from  a  lower  ani- 
mal by  that  process  of  natural  selection,  which 
he,  with  Mr.  Darwin,  holds  to  be  sufficient  for 
the  evolution  of  all  animals  below  man ;  while 
Mr.  Mivart,  admitting  that  natural  selection 
has  been  one  of  the  conditions  of  the  animals 
below  man,  maintains  that  natural  selection 
must,  even  in  their  case,  have  been  supple- 
mented by  some  other  cause,  —  of  the  nature 
of  which,  unfortunately,  he  does  not  give  us 
any  idea.     Thus  Mr.  Mivart  is  less  of  a  Dar- 


WriAT  IS  DARWINISM f  81 

winian  than  Mr.  Wallace,  for  he  has  faith  in 
the  power  of  natural  selection.  But  he  is  more 
of  an  evolutionist  than  Mr.  Wallace,  because 
Mr.  Wallace  thinks  it  necessary  to  call  in  an 
intelligent  agent,  a  sort  of  sujDernatural  Sir 
John  Sebright,  to  produce  even  the  animal 
frame  of  man  ;  while  Mr.  Mivart  requires  no 
Divine  assistance  till  he  comes  to  man's  soul."  ^ 

^  Contemporary  Revieto,  \o\.  x\m.  1871,  p.  444.  In  this  same 
article  Mr.  Huxley  says  :  "  Elijah's  great  question,  Will  ye  serve 
God  or  Baal?  Choose  ye,  is  uttered  audibly  enough  in  the  eax's  of 
every  one  of  us  as  we  come  to  manhood.  Let  every  man  who  tries 
to  answer  it  seriously  ask  himself  whether  he  can  be  satisfied  with 
the  Baal  of  authority,  and  with  all  the  good  things  his  worship- 
pers are  promised  in  this  world  and  the  next.  If  he  can,  let  him, 
if  he  be  so  inclined,  amuse  himself  with  such  scientific  imple- 
ments as  authority  tells  him  are  safe  and  will  not  cut  his  fingers ; 
but  let  him  not  imagine  that  he  is,  or  can  be,  both  a  true  son  of 
the  Church  and  a  loyal  soldier  of  science."  "  And,  on  the  other 
hand,  if  the  blind  acceptance  of  authority  appear  to  him  in  its 
true  colors,  as  mere  private  judgment  in  excelsis,  and  if  he  have 
courage  to  stand  alone  face  to  face  with  the  abyss  of  the  Eternal 
and  Unknowable,  let  him  be  content,  once  for  all,  not  only  to 
renounce  the  good  things  promised  by  'Infallibility,'  but  even 
to  bear  the  bad  things  which  it  pi-ophesies ;  content  to  follow 
reason  and  fact  in  singleness  and  honesty  of  purpose,  wherever 
they  may  lead,  in  the  sure  faith  that  a  hell  of  honest  men  will 
to  him  be  more  endurable  than  a  paradise  full  of  angelic  shams." 
There  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  Apostle  Paul  believed  in  the 
infalhbility  of  the  Scriptures.  Imagine  Professor  Huxley  calling 
St.  Paul  to  his  face,  a  sham  !  What  are  all  the  Huxleys  who 
have  ever  lived  or  ever  can  live,  to  that  one  Paul  in  power  for 
good  over  human  thought,  character,  and  destiny ! 


82  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

In  the  "  Academy  "  for  October,  1869,  there  is 
a  review  by  Professor  Huxley  of  Dr.  Haeckel's 
"NaturHgche  Schopfungsgeschichte,"  in  which 
he  says  :  "  Professor  Haeckel  enlarges  on  the 
service  which  the  '  Origin  of  Species  '  has  done 
in  favoring  what  he  terms  '  the  causal  or  me- 
chanical '  view  of  living  nature  as  opposed  to 
the  '  teleological  or  vitalistic  '  view.  And  no 
doubt  it  is  quite  true  the  doctrine  of  evolution 
is  the  most  formidable  of  all  the  commoner  and 
coarser  forms  of  teleology.  Perhaps  the  most 
remarkable  service  to  the  philosophy  of  Bio- 
logy rendered  by  Mr.  Darwin  is  the  reconcilia- 
tion of  Teleology  and  Morphology,  and  the 
explanation  of  the  facts  of  both  which  his 
view  offers. 

"  The  teleology  which  supposes  that  the  eye, 

Professor  Huxley  goes  on  in  tbe  next  paragraph  to  say :  "  Mr. 
Mivart  asserts  that  '  without  belief  in  a  personal  God  there  is  no 
reUgion  worthy  of  the  name.'  This  is  a  matter  of  opinion.  But 
it  may  be  asserted,  with  less  reason  to  fear  contradiction,  that 
the  worship  of  a  personal  God,  who,  on  Mr.  Mivart's  hypothesis, 
must  have  used  words  studiously  calculated  to  deceive  his 
creatures  and  worshippers,  is  '  no  religion  worthy  of  the  name.' 
'  Incredibile  est,  Deum  ilUs  verbis  ad  populum  fuisse  locutum 
quibis  deciperetur, '  is  a  verdict  in  which  for  once  Jesuit  casuis- 
try concurs  with  the  healthy  moral  sense  of  all  mankind." 
(p.  458).  Mr.  Huxley  calls  believers  in  the  Scriptures,  and 
(apparently)  believers  in  a  personal  God,  bigots,  old  ladies  of 
both  sexes,  bibliolators,  fools,  etc.,  etc. 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  83 

such  as  we  see  it  in  man  or  in  the  higher  ver- 
tebrata,  was  made  with  the  precise  structure 
which  it  exhibits,  to  make  the  animal  which 
possesses  it  to  see,  has  undoubtedly  received  its 
death-blow.  But  it  is  necessary  to  remember 
that  there  is  a  higher  teleology,  which  is  not 
touched  by  the  doctrine  of  evolution,  but  is  act- 
ually based  on  the  fundamental  proposition  of 
evolution.  That  proposition  is,  that  the  whole 
world,  living  and  not  living,  is  the  result  of  the 
mutual  interaction,  according  to  definite  laws, 
of  forces  possessed  by  the  molecules  of  which 
the  primitive  nebulosity  of  the  universe  was 
composed.  If  this  be  true,  it  is  no  less  certain 
that  the  existing  world  lay  potentially  in  the 
cosmic  vapor;  and  that  a  sufficient  intelligence 
could,  from  a  knowledge  of  the  properties  of 
that  vapor,  have  predicted,  say,  the  state  of 
fauna  of  Great  Britain  in  1869,  with  as  much 
certainty  as  one  can  say  what  will  hapj)en  to 
the  vapor  of  the  breath  on  a  cold  winter's 
day."  This,  is  the  doctrine  of  the  self-evolution 
of  the  universe.  We  know  not  what  may  lie 
behind  this  in  Mr.  Huxley's  mind ;  but  we  are 
very  sure  that  there  is  not  an  idea  in  the 
above  paragraph  which  Epicurus  of  old,  and 
Biichner,  Voght,  Haeckel,  and  other  "  Material- 


84  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

isten  von  Profession,"  would  not  cheerfully 
adopt.  His  distinction  between  a  higher  and 
lower  teleology  is  of  no  account  in  this  dis- 
cussion. What  is  the  teleology  to  which,  he 
says,  Mr.  Darwin  has  given  the  death-blow, 
the  extracts  given  above  clearly  show.  The 
eye,  Huxley  says,  was  not  made  for  the  pur- 
pose of  seeing,  or  the  ear  for  the  purpose  of 
hearing.  "  According  to  teleology,"  he  says, 
"  each  organism  is  like  a  rifle  bullet  fired 
straight  at  a  mark  ;  according  to  Darwin,  or- 
ganisms are  like  grapeshot,  of  which  one  hits 
something  and  the  rest  fall  wide."  ^ 

Buch7ie7\ 

Dr.  Louis  Biichner,  president  of  the  medical 
association  of  Hessen-Darmstadt,  etc.,  etc.,  is 
not  only  a  man  of  science  but  a  popular  writer. 
Perhaps  no  book  of  its  class,  in  our  day,  has 
been  so  widely  circulated  as  his  volume  on 
''  Kraft  und  Stoff,"  Matter  and  Force.  It  has 
been  translated  into  all  the  languages  of  Eu- 
rope. He  holds  that  matter  and  force  are 
inseparable  ;  there  cannot  be  the  one  without 
the  other  ;  both  are  eternal  and  imperishable  ; 
neither  can  be  either  increased  or  diminished ; 

1  Lay  Sermons,  etc.  p.  331. 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  85 

life  originated  spontaneously  by  the  combina- 
tion of  molecules  of  matter  under  favorable 
conditions ;  all  the  phenomena  of  the  universe, 
inorganic  and  organic,  whether  physical,  vital, 
or  mental,  are  due  to  matter  and  its  forces. 
Consequently  there  is  no  God,  no  creation,  no 
mind  distinct  from  matter,  no  conscious  exist- 
ence of  man  after  death.  All  this  is  asserted 
in  the  most  explicit  terms.  Dr.  Biichner  has 
published  a  work  on  Darwinism  in  two  vol- 
umes. Darwin's  theory,  he  says,  "  is  the  most 
thoroughly  naturalistic  that  can  be  imagined, 
and  far  more  atheistic  than  that  of  his  decried 
predecessor  Lamarck,  who  admitted  at  least  a 
general  law  of  progress  and  development ; 
whereas,  according  to  Darwin,  the  whole  de- 
velopment is  due  to  the  gradual  summation 
of  innumerable  minute  and  accidental  opera- 
tions." 1 

Carl   Vogt. 

In  his  preface  to  his  work  on  the  "  Descent 
of  Man,"  Mr.  Darwin  quotes  this  author  as  a 
high  authority.  We  see  him  elsewhere  refer- 
red to  as  one  of  the  first  physiologists  of  Ger- 
many.   Vogt  devotes  the  concluding  lecture  of 

^  Sechs  Vorlesungen  iiber  die  Darwinische  Theorie.  Von  Lud- 
wig  Biichner.     Zweite  Auflage,  Leipzig,  1848,  vol.  i.  p.  125. 


86  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM f 

the  second  volume  of  his  work  on  Man,  to  the 
consideration  of  Darwinism,  He  expresses  his 
opinion  of  it,  after  high  commendation,  in  the 
following  terms.  He  says  that  it  cannot  be 
doubted  that  Darwin's  "  theory  turns  the  Cre- 
ator —  and  his  occasional  intervention  in  the 
revolutions  of  the  earth  and  in  the  produc- 
tion of  species  —  without  any  hesitation  out  of 
doors,  inasmuch  as  it  does  not  leave  the  small- 
est room  for  the  agency  of  such  a  Being.  The 
first  living  germ  being  granted,  out  of  it  the 
creation  develops  itself  progressively  by  natu- 
ral selection,  through  all  the  geological  periods 
of  our  planets,  by  the  simple  law  of  descent  — 
no  new  species  arises  by  creation  and  none 
perishes  by  divine  annihilation  —  the  natural 
course  of  things,  the  process  of  evolution  of  all 
organisms  and  of  the  earth  itself,  is  of  itself 
sufficient  for  the  production  of  all  we  see. 
Thus  Man  is  not  a  special  creation,  produced 
in  a  different  way,  and  distinct  from  other  ani- 
mals, endowed  with  an  individual  soul  and 
animated  by  the  breath  of  God  ;  on  the  con- 
trary, Man  is  only  the  highest  product  of  the 
progressive  evolution  of  animal  life  springing 
from  the  group  of  apes  next  below  him."  ^ 

^  Vorlesungen  iiber  den  Menschen,  seine  Stellung  in  der  Schoej)- 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM f  87 

After  this  no  one  can  be  surprised  to  hear 
him  say,  that  "  the  pulpits  of  the  orthodox,  the 
confessionals  of  the  priests,  the  platforms  of  the 
interior  missions,  the  presidential  chairs  of  the 
consistories,  resound  with  protestations  against 
the  assaults  made  by  Materialism  and  Darwin- 
ism against  the  very  foundations  of  society." 
(p.  286)  This  he  calls  "Das  Wehgeschrei  der 
Moralisten  "  (the  Wail  of  the  Moralists).  The 
designation  Moralists  is  a  felicitous  one,  as  ap- 
plied to  the  opponents  of  Vogt  and  his  associ- 
ates. It  distinguishes  them  as  men  who  have 
not  lost  their  moral  sense  ;  who  refuse  to  limit 
their  faith  to  what  can  be  proved  by  the  five 
senses ;  who  bow  to  the  authority  of  the  law 
written  by  the  finger  of  God,  on  the  hearts  of 
men,  which  neither  sophistry  nor  wickedness 
can  effectually  erase.  All  Vogt  thinks  it  nec- 
essary to  reply  to  these  Moralists  is,  ''  Lasst  sie 
bellen,  bis  sie  ausgebellt  haben  "  (Let  them 
bark  till  they  are  tired).  "  Ende." 

Haeckel. 

Dr.  Ernst  Haeckel,  Professor  in  the  Univer- 
sity of  Jena,  is  said  to  stand  at  the  head  of 

funfj  und  in  der  Geschichte  der  Erde.  Von   Carl  Vogt.    Giessen, 
1863,  vol.  ii.  p.  260. 


88  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

the  living  naturalists  of  Germany.  His  work 
on  "  Natural  History  of  Creation  "  contains  a 
course  of  lectures  delivered  to  the  professors, 
students,  and  citizens  of  Jena.  It  is,  therefore, 
somewhat  popular  in  its  character.  The  abil- 
ity of  the  writer  is  manifest  on  every  page. 
The  distinctness  of  his  perceptions,  precis- 
ion of  language,  perspicuity  of  style,  and  the 
strength  of  his  convictions,  give  the  impression 
of  a  man  fully  master  of  his  subject,  who  has 
thought  himself  through,  and  is  perfectly  sat- 
isfied with  the  conclusions  at  which  he  has 
arrived.  At  the  same  time  it  is  the  impression 
of  a  man  who  is  developed  only  on  one  side ; 
who  never  looks  within ;  who  takes  no  cogni- 
zance of  the  wonders  revealed  in  conscious- 
ness ;  to  whom  the  intuitions  of  reason  and  of 
the  conscience,  the  sense  of  dependence  on  a 
will  higher  than  our  own  —  the  sense  of  obli- 
gation and  responsibility  are  of  no  account,  — 
in  short  a  man  to  whom  the  image  of  God  en- 
stamped  on  the  soul  of  man  is  invisible.  This 
being  the  case,  he  that  is  least  in  the  kingdom 
of  heaven  is  greater  than  he. 

Haeckel  admits  that  the  title  of  his  book, 
^•Natural  Creation,"  i.  e.  creation  by  natural 
laws,   is   a    contradiction.      He    distinguishes, 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  89 

however,  between  the  creation  of  substance 
and  the  creation  of  form.  Of  the  former  he 
says  science  knows  nothing.  To  the  scientist 
matter  is  eternal.  If  any  one  chooses  to  as- 
sume that  it  was  created  by  an  extramundane 
power,  Haeckel  says  he  will  not  object.  But 
that  is  a  matter  of  faith  ;  and  "  where  faith  be- 
gins, science  ends."  The  very  reverse  of  this 
is  true.  Science  must  begin  with  faith.  It 
cannot  take  a  single  step  without  it.  How 
does  Haeckel  know  that  his  senses  do  not 
deceive  him  ?  How  does  he  know  that  he  can 
trust  to  the  operations  of  his  intellect  ?  How 
does  he  know  that  things  are  as  they  appear  ? 
How  does  he  know  that  the  universe  is  not  a 
great  phantasmagoria,  as  so  many  men  have  re- 
garded it,  and  man  the  mere  sport  of  chimeras  ? 
He  must  believe  in  the  laws  of  belief  impressed 
on  his  nature.  Knowledge  implies  a  mind 
that  knows,  and  confidence  in  the  act  of  know- 
ing implies  belief  in  the  laws  of  mind.  "  An 
inductive  science  of  nature,"  says  President 
Porter,  "  presupposes  a  science  of  induction, 
and  a  science  of  induction  presupposes  a  sci- 
ence of  man."  ^     Haeckel,  however,  says  faith 

1   The    Science  of  Nature   versus  the  Science  of  Man.      By 
Noah  Porter,  President  of  Yale  College.   New  York,  1871,  p.  2D. 


90  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

is  the  mere  product  of  the  poetic  imagination ; 
science,  of  the  understanding;  if  its  conclu- 
sions come  into  conflict  with  the  creations  of 
the  imagination,  the  latter,  of  course,  must  give 
way.^ 

He  says,  there  have  ever  been  two  conflict- 
ing theories  of  the  universe  :  the  one,  monistic  ; 
the  other,  dualistic.  The  one  admits  of  only 
one  substance,  matter  ;  the  other  of  two,  mat- 
ter and  mind.  He  prefers  to  call  the  former 
monism  rather  than  materialism,  because  the 
latter  term  often  includes  the  idea  of  moral 
materialism,  i,  e.  the  doctrine  that  sensual 
pleasure  is  the  end  of  life ;  a  doctrine,  he  says, 
much  more  frequently  held  by  princely  church- 
men than  by  men  of  science.  He  maintains, 
however,  that  '"  all  knowable  nature  is  one ; 
that  the  same  eternal,  immutable  (ehernen, 
brazen)  laws  are  active  in  the  life  of  animals 
and  plants,  in  the  formation  of  crystals,  and 
the  power  of  steam ;  in  the  whole  sphere  of 
biology,  zoology,  and  botany.  We  have, 
therefore,  the  right  to  hold  fast  the  monistic 
and  mechanical  view,  whether  men  choose  to 

^  NaliirUche  SchopfungsgescMchfe.  Von  Dr.  Ernst  Haeckel, 
Professor  in  der  Universitat  Jena.  Zvveite  Auflage,  Berlin, 
1873,  pp.  8,  and  9. 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  91 

brand  the  system  as  Materialism  or  not.  In 
this  sense,  all  natural  science,  with  the  law  of 
causation  at  its  head,  is  thoroughly  material- 
istic." (p.  32) 

The  monistic  theory  he  calls  ''  mechanical  or 
causal,"  as  distinguished  from  the  dualistic 
theory,  which  he  calls  "  teleological  or  vital  is- 
tic."  According  to  the  latter,  "  the  vegetable 
and  animal  kingdoms  are  considered  as  the 
products  of  a  creative  agency,  working  with  a 
definite  design.  In  looking  on  an  organism,  the 
conviction  seems  unavoidable  that  so  skilfully 
constructed  a  machine,  such  a  complicated 
working  apparatus,  as  an  organism  is,  could 
be  produced  only  by  an  agency  analogous  to, 
although  far  more  perfect  than  the  agency  of 
man."  "  This,"  he  says,  "  sujDposes  the  Crea- 
tor to  be  an  organism  analogous  to  man,  al- 
though infinitely  more  perfect;  who  contem- 
jDlates  his  formative  powers,  lays  the  plan  of 
the  machine,  and  then,  by  the  use  of  appro- 
priate means,  produces  an  effect  answering  to 
the  preconceived  plan.  ....  However  highly 
the  Creator  may  be  exalted,  this  view  involves 
the  ascription  to  Him  of  human  attributes,  in 
virtue  of  which  he  can  form  a  plan,  and  con- 
struct organisms  to  correspond  with  it.     That 


92  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

is  the  view  to  which  Darwin's  doctrine  is  di- 
rectly opposed,  and  of  which  Agassiz  is,  among 
naturahsts,  the  most  important  advocate.  The 
famous  work  of  Agassiz,  '  Essay  on  Classifica- 
tion,' which  is  in  direct  opposition  to  Darwin's, 
and  appeared  about  the  same  time,  has  carried 
out  logically  to  the  utmost  the  absurd  an- 
thropomorphic doctrine  of  a  Creator."  (p.  17) 

The  monistic  theory  is  called  "  mechanical 
and  causal,"  because  it  supposes  that  all  the 
phenomena  of  the  universe,  organic  and  inor- 
ganic, vegetable  and  animal,  vital  and  mental, 
are  due  to  mechanical  or  necessarily  operating 
causes  (causae  efficientes)  ;  just  as  the  dualistic 
theory  is  called  "  teleological  or  vitalistic," 
because  it  refers  natural  organisms  to  causes 
working  for  the  accomplishment  of  a  given  end 
(causae  finales),  (p.  67) 

The  grand  difficulty  in  the  way  of  the  me- 
chanical or  monistic  theory  was  the  occurrence 
of  innumerable  organisms,  apparently  at  least, 
indicative  of  design.  To  get  over  this  diffi- 
culty, Haeckel  says,  some  who  could  not 
believe  in  a  creative  and  controlling  mind 
adopted  the  idea  of  a  metaphysical  ghost  called 
vitality.  The  grand  service  rendered  by  Dar- 
win to  science  is,  that  his  theory  enables  us  to 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  93 

account  for  the  appearances  of  design  in  nature 
without  assuming  final  causes,  or,  a  mind  work- 
ing for  a  foreseen  and  intended  end.  "  All  that 
had  appeared  before  Darwin,"  he  says,  "  failed 
to  secure  success,  and  to  meet  with  general 
acceptance  of  the  doctrine  of  the  mechanical 
production  of  vegetable  and  animal  organisms. 
This  was  accomplished  by  Darwin's  theory." 
(p-20) 

The  precise  difficulty  which  Mr.  Darwin  s 
doctrine  has,  according  to  Haeckel,  enabled 
men  of  science  to  surmount,  is  thus  clearly 
stated  on  p.  633.  It  is,  "that  organs  for  a 
definite  end  should  be  produced  by  unde- 
signing  or  mechanical  causes."  This  difficulty 
is  overcome  by  the  doctrine  of  evolution. 
"  Through  the  theory  of  descent,  we  are  for  the 
first  time  able  to  establish  the  monistic  doc- 
trine of  the  unity  of  nature,  that  a  mechanic- 
causal  explanation  of  the  most  complicated 
organisms,  e.  g.  the  formation  and  constitution 
of  the  organs  of  sense,  have  no  more  difficulty 
for  the  common  understanding,  than  the  me- 
chanical explanation  of  any  physical  process, 
as,  for  example,  earthquakes,  the  direction  of 
the  winds,  or  the  currents  of  the  sea.  We 
thus  arrive  at  the  conviction  of  the  last  im- 


94  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

portance,  that  all  natural  bodies  with  which  we 
are  acquainted  are  equally  endowed  with  life 
(gleichmassig  belebt  sind) ;  that  the  distinc- 
tion between  Hvino-  and  dead  matter  does  not 

o 

exist.  When  a  stone  is  thrown  into  the  air 
and  falls  by  certain  laws  to  the  ground,  or 
when  a  solution  of  salt  forms  a  crystal,  the 
result  is  neither  more  nor  less  a  mechanical 
manifestation  of  life,  than  the  flowering  of  a 
plant,  the  generation  or  sensibility  of  animals, 
or  the  feelings  or  the  mental  activity  of  man. 
In  thus  establishing  the  monistic  theory  of 
nature  lies  the  highest  and  most  comprehen- 
sive merit  of  the  doctrine  of  descent,  as  re- 
formed by  Darwin."  (p.  21)  "As  to  the  much 
vaunted  design  in  nature,  it  is  a  reality  only 
for  those  whose  views  of  animal  and  vegetable 
life  are  to  the  last  degree  superficial.  Any 
one  who  has  gone  deeper  into  the  organization 
and  vital  activity  of  animals  and  plants,  who 
has  made  himself  familiar  with  the  action  and 
reaction  of  vital  phenomena,  and  the  so-called 
economy  of  nature,  comes  of  necessity  to  the 
conclusion,  that  design  does  not  exist,  any 
more  than  the  vaunted  goodness  of  the  Crea- 
tor" (die  vielgerlihmte  Allgiite  des  Schopfers). 
(p.  17) 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  95 

Professor  Huxley,  in  his  review  of  this  work 
of  Haeckel,  already  quoted,  says :  "  I  do  not 
like  to  conclude  without  reminding  the  reader 
of  my  entire  concurrence  with  the  general 
tenor  and  spirit  of  the  work,  and  of  my  high 
estimate  of  its  value."  K  you  take  out  of 
Haeckel's  book  its  doctrine  of  Monism,  which 
he  himself  says  means  Materialism,  it  has  no 
"tenor  or  spirit"  in  it.  It  is  not,  however, 
for  us  to  say  how  far  Professor  Huxley  in- 
tended his- indorsement  to  go. 

Haeckel  says  that  Darwin's  theory  of  evolu- 
tion leads  inevitably  to  Atheism  and  Material- 
ism. In  this  we  think  he  is  correct.  But  we 
have  nothing  to  do  with  Haeckel's  logic  or 
with  our  own.  We  make  no  charge  against 
Mr.  Darwin.  We  cite  Haeckel  merely  as  a  wit- 
ness to  the  fact  that  Darwinism  involves  the 
denial  of  final  causes ;  that  it  excludes  all  intel- 
ligent design  in  the  production  of  the  organs 
of  plants  and  animals,  and  even  in  the  produc- 
tion of  the  soul  and  body  of  man.  This  first 
of  German  naturalists  would  occupy  a  strange 
position  in  the  sight  of  all  Europe,  if,  after 
lauding  a  book  to  the  skies  because  it  teaches 
a  certain  doctrine,  it  should  turn  out  that  the 
book  taught  no  such  doctrine  at  all. 


96  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

The  Opponents  of  Darwinism. 
The  DuJce  of  Argyll. 
When  cultivated  men  undertake  to  refute  a 
certain  system,  it  is  to  be  presumed  that  they 
give  themselves  the  trouble  to  ascertain  what 
that  system  is.  As  the  advocates  of  Mr.  Dar- 
win's theory  defend  and  applaud  it  because  it 
excludes  design,  and  as  its  opponents  make 
that  the  main  ground  of  their  objection  to  it, 
there  can  be  no  reasonable  doubt  as  to  its  real 
character.  The  question  is,  How  are  the  con- 
trivances in  nature  to  be  accounted  for  ?  One 
answer  is.  They  are  due  to  the  purpose  of  God. 
Mr.  Darwin  says,  They  are  due  to  the  gradual 
and  undesigned  accumulation  of  slight  varia- 
tions. The  Duke's  first  objection  to  that  doc- 
trine is,  that  the  evidence  of  design  in  the  or- 
gans of  plants  and  animals  is  so  clear  that  Mr. 
Darwin  himself  cannot  avoid  using  teleological 
language.  "  He  exhausts,"  he  says,  "  every 
form  of  words  and  of  illustration  by  which 
intention  or  mental  purpose  can  be  described. 
'  Contrivance,' '  beautiful  contrivance,'  '  curious 
contrivance,'  are  expressions  which  occur  over 
and  over  again.  Here  is  one  sentence  de- 
scribing a.  particular  species  (of  orchids)  :  '  The 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  97 

labellum  is  developed  in  oi^der  to  attract  the 
Lepidoptera ;  and  we  shall  soon  see  reason  for 
supposing  that  the  nectar  is  purposely  so 
lodged,  that  it  can  be  sucked  only  slowly  in 
order  to  give  time  for  the  curious  chemical 
quality  of  the  matter  setting  hard  and  dry.'  "  ^ 
We  have  already  seen  that  Mr.  Darwin's  an- 
swer to  this  objection  is,  that  it  is  hard  to  keep 
from  personifying  nature,  and  that  these  ex- 
pressions as  used  by  him  mean  no  more  than 
chemists  mean  when  they  speak  of  affinities, 
and  one  element  preferring  another. 

A  second  objection  is,  that  a  variation  would 
not  be  useful  to  the  individual  in  which  it  hap- 
pens to  occur,  unless  other  variations  should 
occur  at  the  right  time  and  in  the  right  order  ; 
and  that  the  concurrence  of  so  many  accidents 
as  are  required  to  account  for  the  infinite  di- 
versity of  forms  in  plants  and  animals,  is  alto- 
gether inconceivable. 

A  third  objection  is,  that  the  variations  often 
have  no  reference  to  the  organism  of  the  ani- 
mal itself  but  to  other  organisms.  "  Take  one 
instance,"  he  says,  "  out  of  millions.  The 
poison  of  a  deadly  snake,  —  let  us  for  a  mo- 
ment consider  what  that  is.     It  is  a  secretion 

1  Reign  of  Lnw.     London,  1867,  p.  40. 


98  WHAT  TS  DARWINISMf 

of  definite  chemical  properties  with  reference 
not  only  —  not  even  mainly  —  to  the  organism 
of  the  animal  in  which  it  is  developed,  but 
specially  to  another  animal  which  it  is  in- 
tended to  destroy."  "How,"  he  asks,  "will 
the  law  of  growth  adjust  a  poison  in  one  ani- 
mal with  such  subtle  knowledge  of  the  organi- 
zation of  the  other,  that  the  deadly  virus  shall 
in  a  few  minutes  curdle  the  blood,  benumb  the 
nerves,  and  rush  in  upon  the  citadel  of  life  ? 
There  is  but  one  explanation :  a  Mind  having 
minute  and  perfect  knowledge  of  the  structure 
of  both  has  designed  the  one  to  be  capable  of 
inflicting  death  upon  the  other.  This  mental 
purpose  and  resolve  is  the  one  thing  which  our 
intelligence  perceives  mth  direct  and  intuitive 
recognition.  The  method  of  creation  by  which 
this  purpose  has  been  carried  into  effect  is  ut- 
terly unknown."  -^ 

A  fourth  objection  has  reference  to  beauty. 
According  to  Mr.  Darwin,  flowers  are  not  in- 
tentionally made  beautiful,  but  those  which 
happen  to  be  beautiful  attract  insects,  and  by 
their  agency  are  fertilized  and  survive.  Male 
birds  are  not  intentionally  arrayed  in  bright 
colors,  but  those  which  happen   to   be  so  ar- 

*  Reign  of  Lave.     London,  1867,  p.  37. 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  99 

rayed  are  attractive,  and  thus  become  the 
progenitors  of  their  race.  Against  this  expla- 
nation the  Duke  earnestly  protests.  He  re- 
fers to  the  gorgeous  adorned  class  of  Humming- 
birds, of  which  naturalists  enumerate  no  less 
than  four  hundred  and  thirty  different  species, 
distinguished  one  from  the  other,  in  general, 
only  by  their  plumage.  "  Now,"  he  asks, 
"  what  explanation  does  the  law  of  natural  se- 
lection give,  —  I  will  not  say  of  the  origin,  but 
even  of  the  continuance  of  such  specific  vari- 
eties as  these  ?  None  whatever.  A  crest  of 
topaz  is  no  better  in  the  struggle  of  existence 
than  a  crest  of  sapphire.  A  frill  ending  in 
spangles  of  the  emerald  is  no  better  in  the 
battle  of  life  than  a  frill  ending  in  spangles 
of  the  ruby.  A  tail  is  not  affected  for  the  pur- 
poses of  flight,  whether  its  marginal,  or  its 
central  feathers  are  decorated  with  white.  It 
is  impossible  to  bring  such  varieties  into  any 
physical  law  known  to  us.  It  has  relation 
however  to  a  Purpose,  which  stands  in  close 
analogy  with  our  knowledge  of  purpose  in 
the  works  of  men.  Mere  beauty  and  mere 
variety,  for  their  own  sake,  are  objects  which 
we  ourselves  seek,  when  we  can  make  the 
forces    of   nature    subordinate    to   the   attain- 


]00  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

ment  of  them.  There  seems  to  be  no  conceiv- 
able reason  why  we  should  doubt  or  question 
that  these  are  ends  and  aims  also  in  the  forms 
given  to  living  organisms,  Avhen  the  facts  cor- 
respond with  this  view  and  with  no  other."  ^ 

It  will  be  observed  that  all  these  objections 
have  reference  to  the  denial  of  teleology  on  the 
part  of  Mr.  Darwin.  If  his  theory  admitted 
that  the  organisms  in  nature  were  due  to  a 
divine  purpose,  the  objections  would  be  void  of 
all  meaning. 

There  is  a  fifth  objection.  According  to 
Darwin's  theory  organs  are  formed  by  the 
slow  accumulation  of  unintended  variations, 
which  happen  to  be  favorable  to  the  subject 
of  them  in  the  struggle  for  life.  But  in  many 
cases  these  organs,  instead  of  being  favorable, 
are  injurious  or  cumbersome  until  fully  devel- 
oped. Take  the  wing  of  a  bird,  for  example. 
In  its  rudimental  state,  it  is  useful  neither  for 
swimming,  walking,  nor  flying.  Now,  as  Dar- 
win says  it  took  millions  of  years  to  bring  the 
eye  to  perfection,  how  long  did  it  take  to  ren- 
der a  rudimental  wing  useful  ?  It  is  no  suffi- 
cient answer  to  say  that  these  rudimental  or- 
gans might  have  been  suited  to  the  condition 

^  Reiffii  of  Law,  pp.  247,  248, 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  101 

in  which  the  animal  existed,  during  the  forma- 
tive process.  This  is  perfectly  arbitrary.  It 
has  no  basis  of  fact.  There  are  but  three 
kinds  of  locomotion  that  we  know  of:  in  the 
water,  on  the  ground,  and  through  the  air; 
for  all  these  purposes  a  half-formed  wing  would 
be  an  impediment. 

The  Duke  devotes  almost  a  whole  chapter 
of  his  interesting  book  to  the  consideration 
of  "  contrivance  in  the  machinery  for  flight." 
The  conditions  to  secure  regulated  movement 
through  the  atmosphere  are  so  numerous,  so 
complicated,  and  so  conflicting,  that  the  prob- 
lem never  has  been  solved  by  human  in- 
genuity. In  the  structure  of  the  bird  it  is 
solved  to  perfection.  As  we  are  not  writing 
a  teleological  argument,  but  only  producing 
evidence  that  Darwinism  excludes  teleology, 
we  cannot  follow  the  details  which  prove  that 
the  wing  of  the  gannet  or  swift  is  almost  as 
wonderful  and  beautiful  a  specimen  of  contriv- 
ance as  the  eye  of  the  eagle. 

Agassiz. 

Every  one  knows  that  the  illustrious  Agassiz^ 
over  whose  recent  grave  the  world  stands 
weeping,  was  from  the  beginning  a  pronounced 


102  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

and  earnest  opponent  of  Mr.  Darwin's  theory. 
He  wrote  as  a  naturalist,  and  therefore  his  ob- 
jections are  principally  directed  against  the 
theory  of  evolution,  which  he  regarded  as  not 
only  destitute  of  any  scientific  basis,  but  as 
subversive  of  the  best  established  facts  in 
zoology.  Nevertheless  it  is  evident  that  his 
zeal  was  greatly  intensified  by  his  apprehen- 
sion that  a  theory  which  obliterates  all  evi- 
dence of  the  being  of  God  from  the  works  of 
nature,  endangered  faith  in  that  great  doctrine 
itself.  The  Rev.  Dr.  Peabody,  in  the  discourse 
delivered  on  the  occasion  of  Professor  Agassiz's 
funeral,  said  :  "  I  cannot  close  this  hasty  and 
inadequate,  yet  fervent  and  hearty  tribute, 
without  recalling  to  your  memory  the  reverent 
spirit  in  which  he  pursued  his  scientific  labors. 
Nearly  forty  years  ago,  in  his  first  great  work 
on  fossil  fishes,  in  developing  principles  of 
classificationj  he  wrote  in  quotations,  '  An  in- 
visible thread  in  all  ages  runs  through  this  im- 
mense diversity,  exhibiting  as  a  general  result 
that  there  is  a  continual  progress  in  develop- 
ment ending  in  man,  the  four  classes  of  verte- 
brates presenting  the  intermediate  steps,  and 
the  invertebrates  the  constant  accessory  ac- 
companiment.     Have  we  not  here  the  mani- 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  103 

festation  of  a  mind  as  powerful  as  prolific  ?  an 
act  of  intelligence  as  sublime  as  provident  ? 
the  marks  of  goodness  as  infinite  as  wise  ?  the 
most  palpable  demonstration  of  the  existence 
of  a  personal  God,  author  of  all  this ;  ruler 
of  the  universe,  and  the  dispenser  of  all  good  ? 
This  at  least  is  what  I  read  in  the  works  of 
creation.'  And  it  was  what  he  ever  read,  and 
with  profound  awe  and  adoration.  To  this  ex- 
alted faith  he  was  inflexibly  loyal.  The  laws 
of  nature  were  to  him  the  eternal  Word  of 
God. 

"  His  repugnance  to  Darwinism  grew  in 
great  part  from  his  apprehension  of  its  atheis- 
tical tendency,  —  an  apprehension  which  I  con- 
fess I  cannot  share  ;  for  I  forget  not  that  these 
theories,  now  in  the  ascendent,  are  maintained 
by  not  a  few  devout  Christian  men,  and  while 
they  appear  to  me  unproved  and  incapable  of 
demonstration,  I  could  admit  them  without 
parting  with  one  iota  of  my  faith  in  God  and 
Christ.  Yet  I  cannot  but  sympathize  most 
strongly  with  him  in  the  spirit  in  which  he 
resisted  what  seemed  to  him  -  lese-majesty 
ao-ainst  the  sovereio;n  of  the  universe.  Nor 
was  his  a  theoretical  faith.  His  whole  life,  in 
its  broad  philanthropy,  in  its  pervading  spirit 


104  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

of  service,  in  its  fidelity  to  arduous  trusts  and 
duties,  and  in  its  simplicity  and  truthfulness, 
bespoke  one  who  was  consciously  fulfilling  a 
mission  from  God  to  his  fellow-men." 

The  words  "  evolution  "  and  "  Darwinism  " 
are  so  often  in  this  country,  but  not  in  Europe, 
used  interchangeably,  that  it  is  conceivable 
that  Dr.  Peabody  could  retain  his  faith  in  God, 
and  yet  admit  the  doctrine  of  evolution.  But 
it  is  not  conceivable  that  any  man  should  adopt 
the  main  element  of  Mr.  Darwin's  theory,  viz., 
the  denial  of  all  final  causes,  and  the  assertion, 
that  since  the  first  creation  of  matter  and  life, 
God  has  left  the  universe  to  the  control  of  un- 
intelligent physical  causes,  so  that  all  the  phe- 
nomena of  the  plants  and  animals,  all  that  is  in 
man,  and  all  that  has  ever  happened  on  the 
earth,  is  due  to  physical  force,  and  yet  retain 
his  faith  in  Christ.  On  that  theory,  there  have 
been  no  supernatural  revelation,  no  miracles ; 
Christ  is  not  risen,  and  we  are  yet  in  our  sins. 
It  is  not  thus  that  this  matter  is  regarded 
abroad.  The  Christians  of  Germany  say  that 
the  only  alternative  these  theories  leave  us, 
is  Heathenism  or  Christianity  ;  "  Heidenthnm 
oder  Christenthum,  Die  Frage  der  Zeit." 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  105 

Jatiet. 

Janet,  a  professor  of  philosophy,  is  the  au- 
thor of  a  book  on  the  Materialism  of  Biichner.^ 
The  greater  part  of  the  last  chapter  of  his 
work  is  devoted  to  Darwinism.  He  says,  "  Dr. 
Biichner  invoked  (Darwin's  book)  as  a  striking 
confirmation  of  his  doctrine."  (p.  154)  What 
BUchner's  doctrine  is  has  been  shown  on  a 
previous  page.  The  points  of  coincidence  be- 
tween Darwin's  system  and  his  are,  that  both 
regard  mind  as  a  mere  function  of  living  mat- 
ter J  and  both  refer  all  the  organs  and  organ- 
isms of  living  things  to  the  unconscious,  unin- 
telligent operation  of  physical  causes.  Buch- 
ner's  way  of  accounting  for  complicated  organs 
was,  "  that  the  energy  of  the  elements  and 
forces  of  matter,  which  in  their  fated  and  acci- 
dental occurrence  must  have  produced  innu- 
merable forms,  which  must  needs  limit  each 
other  mutually,  and  correspond,  apparently, 
the  one  with  the  other,  as  if  they  were  made 
for  that  purpose.     Out  of  all  those  forms,  they 

^  The   Materialism  of  the  Present   Day:   a    Critique  of  Dr. 
BUchner's  Si/stem.     By  Paul  Janet,  Member  of  the  Institute  of 
France,  Professor  of  Philosophy  at  the  Paris  Faculte'  des  Let- 
tres.     Translated  from  the  French,  by  Gustave  Masson,  B.  A 
London  and  Paris,  186  7. 


106  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

only  have  survived  which  were  adapted,  in 
some  manner,  to  the  conditions  of  the  medium 
in  which  they  were  placed."  (p.  30)  This  is 
very  clumsy.  No  wonder  Buchner  preferred 
Darwin's  method.  The  two  systems  are,  in- 
deed, exactly  the  same,  but  Mr.  Darwin  has  a 
much  more  winning  way  of  presenting  it. 

Professor  Janet  does  not  seem  to  have  much 
objection  to  the  doctrine  of  evolution  in  itself; 
it  is  the  denial  of  teleology  that  he  regards  as 
the  fatal  element  of  Mr.  Darwin's  theory.  "Ac- 
cording to  us,"  he  says,  "  the  true  stumbling- 
block  of  Mr.  Darwin's  theory,  the  perilous  and 
slippery  point,  is  the  passage  from  artificial  to 
natural  selection ;  it  is  when  he  wants  to  estab- 
lish that  a  blind  and  designless  nature  has  been 
able  to  obtain,  by  the  occurrence  of  circum- 
stances, the  same  results  which  man  obtains  by 
thoughtful  and  well  calculated  industry."  (p. 
174) 

Towards  the  end  of  his  volume  he  says : 
"  We  shall  conclude  by  a  general  observation. 
Notwithstanding  the  numerous  objections  we 
have  raised  against  Mr.  Darwin's  theory,  we  do 
not  declare  ourselves  hostile  to  a  system  of 
which  zoologists  are  the  only  competent  judges. 
We  are  neither  for  nor  against  the  transmu- 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  107 

tation  of  species,  neither  for  nor  against  the 
principle  of  natural  selection.  The  only  positive 
conclusion  of  our  debate  is  this :  no  principle 
hitherto  known,  neither  the  action  of  media, 
nor  habit,  nor  natural  selection,  can  account 
for  organic  adaptations  without  the  interven- 
tion of  the  principle  of  finality.  Natural  selec- 
tion, unguided,  submitted  to  the  laws  of  a  pure 
mechanism,  and  exclusively  determined  by  ac- 
cidents, seems  to  me,  under  another  name, 
the  chance  proclaimed  by  Epicurus,  equally 
barren,  equally  incomprehensible ;  on  the  other 
hand,  natural  selection  guided  beforehand  by  a 
provident  will,  directed  towards  a  precise  end 
by  intentional  laws,  might  be  the  means  which 
nature  has  selected  to  pass  from  one  stage  of 
being  to  another,  from  one  form  to  another,  to 
bring  to  perfection  life  throughout  the  universe, 
and  to  rise  by  a  continuous  process  from  the 
monad  to  man.  Now,  I  ask  Mr.  Darwin  him- 
self, what  interest  has  he  in  maintaining  that 
natural  selection  is  not  guided  —  not  directed  ? 
What  interest  has  he  in  substituting  accidental 
causes  for  every  final  cause  ?  I  cannot  see. 
Let  him  admit  that  in  natural,  as  well  as  in 
artificial  selection,  there  may  be  a  choice  and 
direction;  his   principle  immediately  becomes 


108  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM f 

much  more  fruitful  than  it  was  before.  His 
hypothesis,  then,  whilst  having  the  advantage 
of  exempting  science  from  the  necessity  of 
introducing  the  personal  and  miraculous  inter- 
vention of  God  in  the  creation  of  each  species, 
yet  would  be  free  from  the  banishing  out  of 
the  universe  an  all-provident  thought,  and 
of  submitting  everything  to  blind  and  brute 
chance."  (pp.  198,  199)  Professor  Janet  asks 
far  too  much  of  Mr.  Darwin.  To  ask  him  to 
give  up  his  denial  of  final  causes  is  like  asking 
the  Eomanists  to  give  up  the  Pope.  That  prin- 
ciple is  the  life  and  soul  of  his  system. 

M.  Flour  ens. 

M.  Flourens,  recently  dead,  was  one  of  the 
earliest  and  most  pronounced  opponents  of 
Darwinism.  He  published  in  1864  his  "  Exa- 
men  du  Livre  de  M.  Darwin  sur  FOrigine  des 
Especes."  His  position  as  Member  of  the 
Academic  FranQaise,  and  Perpetual  Secretary 
of  the  Academie  des  Sciences,  or  Institut  de 
France,  vouch  for  his  high  rank  among  the 
French  naturalists.  His  connection  with  the 
Jardin  des  Plantes  ga;^e  him  enlarged  oppor- 
tunities for  biological  experiments.  The  result 
of  his  own  experience,  as  well  as  the  expe- 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  109 

rience  of  other  observers,  was,  as  he  expresses 
it,  his  solemn  conviction  that  species  are  fixed 
and  not  transmutable.  No  ingenuity  of  device 
could  render  hybrids  fertile.  "  They  never  es- 
tablish an  intermediate  species."  It  is,  there- 
fore, to  the  doctrine  of  evolution  his  attention 
is  principally  directed.  Nevertheless,  he  is 
no  less  struck  by  Darwin's  way  of  excluding 
all  intelligence  and  design  in  his  manner  of 
speaking  of  nature.  On  this  point  he  quotes 
the  language  of  Cuvier,  who  says :  "  Nature 
has  been  personified.  Living  beings  have 
been  called  the  works  of  nature.  The  general 
bearing  of  these  creatures  to  each  other  has 
become  the  laws  of  nature.  It  is  thus  while 
considering  Nature  as  a  being  endowed  with 
intelligence  and  will,  but  in  its  power  limited 
and  secondary,  that  it  may  be  said  that  she 
watches  incessantly  over  the  maintenance  of 
her  work  ;   that  she  does  nothing  in  vain,  and 

always  acts  by  the  most  simple  means It 

is  easy  to  see  how  puerile  are  those  who  give 
nature  a  species  of  individual  existence  distinct 
from  the  Creator,  and  from  the  law  which  He 
has  impressed  upon  the  movements  and  pecul- 
iarities of  the  forms  given  by  Him  to  living 
things,  and  which  He  makes  to  act  upon  their 


110  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM f 

bodies  with  a  peculiar  force  and  reason."  Older 
writers,  says  Flourens,  in  speaking  of  Nature, 
"  gave  to  her  inclinations,  intentions,  and  views, 
and  horrors  (of  a  vacuum),  and  sports,"  etc. 
He  says  that  one  of  the  principal  objects  of  his 
book  is  to  show  how  Mr.  Darwin  "  has  deluded 
himself,  and  perhaps  others,  by  a  constant 
abuse  of  figurative  language."  "  He  plays  with 
Nature  as  he  pleases,  and  makes  her  do  what- 
soever he  wishes."  When  we  remember  that 
Mr.  Darwin  defines  Nature  to  be  the  aggregate 
of  physical  forces,  we  see  how,  in  attributing 
everything  to  Nature,  he  effectually  excludes 
the  supernatural. 

In  his  volume  of  "  Lay  Sermons,  Reviews," 
etc..  Professor  Huxley  has  a  very  severe  critique 
on  M.  Flourens's  book.  He  says  little,  however, 
in  reference  to  teleology,  except  in  one  para- 
graph, in  which  we  read  :  "  M.  Flourens  cannot 
imagine  an  unconscious  selection  ;  it  is  for  him 
a  contradiction  in  terms."  Huxley's  answer 
is,  "  The  wmds  and  waves  of  the  Bay  of  Biscay 
have  not  much  consciousness,  and  yet  they  have 
with  great  care  '  selected,'  from  an  infinity  of 
masses  of  silex,  all  grains  of  sand  below  a  cer-- 
tain  size  and  have  heaped  them  by  themselves 
over  a  great  area A  frosty  night  selects 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  Ill 

the  hardy  plants  in  a  phantation  from  among 
the  tender  ones  as  effectually  as  if  the  intelli- 
gence of  the  gardener  had  been  operative  in 
cutting  the  weaker  ones  down."  ^  If  this  means 
anything,  it  means  that  as  the  winds  and  waves 
of  the  Bay  of  Biscay  can  make  heaps  of  sand, 
so  similar  unconscious  agencies  can,  if  you  only 
give  them  time  enough,  make  an  elephant  or 
a  man ;  for  this  is  what  Mr.  Darwin  says  nat- 
ural selection  has  done. 

Bev.  Walter  Mitchell,  M.  A.,  Vice-President  of 
the  Victoria  Institute. 

The  Victoria  Institute,  or  Philosophical  Soci- 
ety of  Great  Britain,  under  the  presidency  of 
the  Earl  of  Shaftesbury,  includes  among  its 
members  many  of  the  dignitaries  of  the  Church 
of  England,  and-^  large  number  of  distin- 
guished men  of  different  professions  and  de- 
nominations. Its  principal  object  is,  "  To 
investigate  fully  and  impartially  the  most  im- 
portant questions  of  philosophy  and  science, 
but  more  especially  those  that  bear  on  the 
great  truths  revealed  in  Holy  Scripture,  with 
the  view  of  defending  these  truths  against  the 
opposition  of  Science,  falsely  so  called."     The 

^  Lay  Sermons,  p.  847. 


112  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

Institute  holds  bi-monthly  meetings,  at  which 
pajDers  are  read  on  some  important  topic,  and 
then  submitted  to  criticism  and  discussion. 
These  papers,  many  of  which  are  very  elabo- 
rate, are  published  in  the  Transactions  of  the 
Institute,  together  with  a  full  report  of  the  dis- 
cussions to  which  they  gave  rise.  Six- volumes, 
replete  with  valuable  and  varied  information, 
have  already  been  published. 

Very  considerable  latitude  of  opinion  is  al- 
lowed. Hence  we  find  in  the  Transactions, 
papers  for  and  against  evolution,  —  for  and 
against  Darwinism.  It  would  be  easy  to  quote 
extracts,  pertinent  to  our  subject,  more  than 
enough  to  fill  a  volume  much  larger  than  the 
present.  We  must  content  ourselves  with  a 
few  citations  from  the  discussion  on  a  paper 
in  favor  of  the  credibility  of  Darwinism,^  and 
-another  in  favor  of  the  doctrine  of  evolution.^ 
In  summing  up  the  debates  on  these  two  topics, 
the  chairman.  Rev.  Walter  Mitchell,  presented 
with  great  clearness  and  force  his  reasons  for 
regarding  Darwinism  as  incredible  and  impos- 
sible.    In  his  protracted  remarks  he  contrasts 

^  The  Credibility  of  Darwinism.  By  George  Warington,  Esq., 
F.  C.  S.,  M.  V.  I. 

2  On  certain  Analogies  betioeen  the  Methods  of  Deity  in  Nature 
and  Revelation.  By  Rev.  G.  E.  Henslow,  M.  A.,  F.  L.  S.,  M. 
V.I. 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  113 

the  Scriptural  doctrine,  that  of  the  Vestiges  of 
Creation,  and  that  of  Darwin  on  the  origin  of 
species.  He  thus  states  the  doctrine  of  the 
Bible  on  the  subject :  "  If,"  he  says,  "  science 
be  another  name  for  real  knowledge  ;  if  science 
be  the  pursuit  of  sound  wisdom  ;  if  science  be 
the  pursuit  of  truth  itself ;  I  say  that  man  has 
no  right  to  reject  anything  that  is  true  be- 
cause it  savors  of  God.  Well,  what  is  this 
hypothesis  —  older  than  that  of  Darwin  — 
which  does,  and  does  alone,  account  for  all  the 
observed  facts,  or  all  that  which  we  can  read, 
recorded  in  the  book  of  Nature  ?  It  is,  that 
God  created  all  things  very  good;  that  He 
made  every  vegetable  after  its  own  kind ;  that 
He  made  every  animal  after  its  own  kind ; 
that  He  allowed  certain  laws  of  variation,  but 
that  He  has  ordained  strict,  though  invisible 
and  invincible  barriers,  which  prevent  that  va- 
riation from  running  riot,  and  which  includes 
it  within  strict  and  well  defined  limits.  This 
is  a  hypothesis  which  will  account  for  all  that 
we  have  learnt  from  the  works  of  Nature.  It 
admits  an  intelligent  Being  as  the  Author  of  all 
the  works  of  creation,  animate  as  well  as  in- 
animate ;  it  leaves  no  mysteries  in  the  animate 
world  unaccounted  for.     There  is    one   thing 


114  WHA  T  IS  DAR WINISM ? 

which  the  anunate,  as  well  as  the  inanimate 
world  declares  to  man,  one  thing  everywhere 
plainly  recorded,  if  we  will  only  read  it,  and 
that  is  the  impress  of  design,  the  design  of  in- 
finite wisdom.  Any  theory  which  comes  in 
with  an  attempt  to  ignore  design  as  manifested 
in  God's  creation,  is  a  theory,  I  say,  which  at- 
tempts to  dethrone  God.  This  the  theory  of 
Darwin  does  endeavor  to  do.  If  asked  how 
our  old  theory  accounts  for  such  uniformity  of 
design  in  the  midst  of  such  perplexing  variety 
as  we  find  in  nature,  we  reply,  that  this  can 
only  be  accounted  for  on  one  admission,  that 
the  Avhole  is  the  work  of  one  Author,  built 
according,  as  it  were,  to  one  style  ;  that  it 
represents  the  unity  of  one  mind  with  the  in- 
finite power  of  adapting  all  its  works  in  the 
most  perfect  manner  for  the  uses  for  which 
they  were  created."  "  Whewell  has  boldly 
maintained,  and  he  has  never  been  contro- 
verted, that  all  real  advances  in  the  sciences 
of  physiology  and  comparative  anatomy,  — 
such  as  that  made  by  Harvey  in  discovering 
the  circulation  of  the  blood,  —  have  been  made 
by  those  who  not  only  believed  in  the  existence 
of  design  everywhere  manifested  in  the  ani- 
mate world,  but  were  led  by  that  belief  to 
make  their  discoveries." 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  115 

When  discussing  the  paper  of  Mr.  Henslow 
on  evohition,  he  says :  "  In  speaking  of  this 
paper  I  must  commend  the  exceeding  reverent 
tone  in  which  the  author  has  discussed  the  sub- 
ject, and  I  should  hke  to  see  all  such  subjects 
discussed  in  a  similar  tone.  The  view  which 
Mr.  Henslow  brings  forward,  however,  does 
not  appear  to  be  a  very  original  one.  It  was 
the  first  view  ever  brought  forward  on  the 
doctrine  of  evolution,  and  I  was  the  first  one 
to  point  out  that  the  whole  doctrine  was  one 
of  retrograde  character.  The  whole  tone  and 
character  of  this  paper,  except  that  which  re- 
lates to  the  attributes  and  moral  government 
of  God,^  is  nothing  more  or  less  than  the  same 
view  of  the  doctrine  of  evolution  which  "created 
such  a  sensation  in  this  country  when  that 
famous  book  came  out,  '  The  Vestiges  of  Crea- 
tion.' So  far  as  I  can  understand  the  argu- 
ments of  Mr.  Darwin,  they  have  simply  been 
an  endeavor  to  eject  out  of  the  idea  of  evolu- 
tion the  personal  work  of  the  Deity.  His 
whole  endeavor  has  been  to  push  the  Creator 
farther  and  farther  back   out  of  view.      The 

^  The  second  part  of  Mr.  Henslow's  paper   concerns    "the 

methods  of  the  Deity  as  revealed  to  us  in  the  Bible."      The 

.*a!i)e   is  substantially  true  of  his  work,   The   Theory  ofEvnhi- 
lio/t. 


116  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM f 

most  laborious  part  of  Darwin's  attempt  at  rea- 
soning, —  for  it  is  not  true  reasoning,  —  the 
most  laborious  part  of  his  logic  and  reasoning, 
is  intended  to  eliminate,  as  perfectly  as  any  of 
the  atheistical  authors  have  endeavored  to  do, 
the  idea  of  design.  Now,  setting  revelation 
aside,  the  manner  in  which  the  xmknown 
author  of  the  '  Vestiges  of  Creation '  treated 
this  subject,  satisfactorily  showed  that  the  doc- 
trine of  evolution  was  not  in  itself  an  atheistical 
doctrine,  nor  did  it  deny  the  existence  of  de- 
sign. So  far  as  I  could  understand  and  make 
out,  having  carefully  read  the  book  at  the  time 
it  came  out  and  afterwards,  and  having  care- 
fully analyzed  and  compared  it  and  Mr.  Dar- 
win's book  with  each  other,  so  far  as  I  could 
understand  it,  the  doctrine  of  the  author  of 
the  '  Vestiges  of  Creation '  was  simply,  that 
God  created  all  things,  and  that  when  He 
created  matter  He  impressed  on  it  certain 
laws ;  that  matter,  being  evolved  according  to 
those  laws,  should  produce  beings  and  organs 
mutually  adapted  to  one  another  and  to  the 
world ;  and  that  every  successive  development 
which  should  be  produced  was  essentially  fore- 
seen, foreknown,  and  predetermined  by  the 
Deity.     His  idea,  for  instance,  of  the  evolution 


WHAT  IS  DARWIXISMf  117 

of  an  eye  from  a  more  simple  organ  was  that 
the  ultimate  eye  —  man's  eye,  for  instance  — 
was  to  be  a  perfect  optical  instrument,  and 
that  its  perfection  depended  on  the  previous 
design  by  the  Creator,  that  at  a  certain  period 
it  should  appear  in  a  body  quite  adapted  for 
its  purposes.  There  is  one  question,  —  and  not 
the  only  one,  but  we  must  consider  it  as  an 
important  question,  —  whether  you  can  main- 
tain a  doctrine  of  evolution  which  shall  not  be 
atheistical,  and  which  shall  admit  the  great  ar- 
gument of  design  ?  That  is  one  thing ;  but  the 
next  thing  is,  does  such  a  doctrine  as  that  ac- 
cord either  with  revelation  or  with  the  facts  of 
science  ?  I  do  not  believe  that  it  can  be  made 
to  agree  with  what  we  believe  to  be  the  re- 
vealed Word  of  God,  and  I  do  not  believe  that 
it  has  in  the  least  degree  been  proved  that  the 
doctrine  is  consistent  with  sound  science." 
\  As  to  Mr.  Darwin's  theory,  it  is  obvious 
from  the  passages  already  quoted  that  he  con- 
siders its  characteristic  feature  is  not  evolution, 
nor  even  natural  selection,  but  the  denial  of 
teleology,  or  of  intelligent  control.  Mr.  Dar- 
win admits  the  original  creation  of  one  or  a 
few  forms  of  life  ;  and  Mr.  Mitchell,  in  his  com- 
ments on  Mr.  Warington's  defence  of  his  theory, 

i 


118  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

asks,  "  Why  am  I  to  limit  the  work  of  the  Cre- 
ator to  the  simultaneous  or  successive  creations 
of  ten  or  twelve  commencements  of  the  ani- 
mate creation  ?  Why,  simply  for  the  purpose 
of  evading  the  evidence  of  design  as  manifested 
in  the  adajDtation  of  all  the  organs  of  every 
animate  creature  to  its  wants,  which  can  only 
be  done  by  so  incredible  an  hypothesis  as 
that  of  Mr.  Darwin.  I  say  fearlessly,  that  any 
hypothesis  which  requires  us  to  admit  that  the 
formation  of  such  complex  organs  as  the  eye, 
the  ear,  the  heart,  the  brain,  with  all  their 
marvellous  structures  and  mechanical  adapta- 
tions to  the  wants  of  the  creatures  possessing 
them,  so  perfectly  in  harmony,  too,  with  the 
laws  of  inorganic  matter,  affords  no  evidence 
of  design ;  that  such  structures  could  be  built 
up  by  gradual  chance  improvements,  perpetu- 
ated by  the  law  of  transmission,  and  perfected 
by  the  destruction  of  cr-eatures  less  favorably 
endowed,  is  so  incredible,  that  I  marvel  to  find 
any  thinking  man  capable  of  adopting  it  for  a 
single  moment."  It  is  useless  to  multiply  quo- 
tations. Darwinism  is  never  brought  up  either 
formally  or  incidentally,  that  its  exclusion  of 
design  in  the  formation  of  living  organisms 
is  not  urged  as  the  main  objection  against  the 
whole  theorv. 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  119 

Principal  Dawson. 

Dr.  Dawson,  as  we  are  informed,  is  re- 
garded as  the  first  palaeontologist,  and  among 
the  first  geologists,  in  America.  In  his  "  Story 
of  Earth  and  Man,"  ^  he  f)asses  in  review  the 
several  geological  periods  recognized  by  geolo- 
gists ;  describes  as  far  as  knowable  the  distri- 
bution of  land  and  water  during  each  period, 
and  the  vegetable  and  animal  productions  by 
which  they  were  distinguished.  His  book  from 
beginning  to  end  is  anti-Darwinian.  In  com- 
mon with  other  naturalists,  his  attention  is 
directed  principally  to  the  doctrine  of  evolu- 
tion, which  he  endeavors  to  prove  is  utterly  un- 
tenable. That  Mr.  Darwin's  theory  excludes 
teleology  is  everywhere  assumed  as  an  uncon- 
troverted  and  uncontrovertible  fact.  "  The 
evolutionist  doctrine,"  he  says,  "  is  itself  one 
of  the  strangest  phenomena  of  humanity.  It 
existed,  and  most  naturally,  in  the  oldest 
philosophy  and  poetry,  in  connection  with  the 
crudest  and   most   uncritical  attempts   of  the 

1  The  Slory  of  Earth  and  Man.  By  J.  W.  Dawson,  LL.  D., 
F.  R.  S.,  F.  G.  S.',  Principal  and  Vice-Chancellor  of  Me  Gill 
University,  Montreal.  Author  of  Archaia,  Acadian  Geology,  qU-.. 
Second  edition.     London,  1873,  pp.  397. 


120  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM f 

human  mind  to  grasp  the  system  of  nature ; 
but  that  in  our  day  a  system  destitute  of  any 
shadow  of  proof,  and  supported  merely  by 
vague  analogies  and  figures  of  speech,  and  by 
the  arbitrary  and  artificial  coherence  of  its  own 
parts,  should  be  accepted  as  philosophy,  and 
should  find  able  adherents  to  string;  on  its 
thread  of  hypotheses  our  vast  and  weighty 
stores  of  knowledge,  is  surpassingly  strange. 
....  In  many  respects  these  speculations  are 
important,  and  worthy  the  attention  of  think- 
ing men.  They  seek  to  revolutionize  the  re- 
ligious belief  of  the  world,  and  if  accepted 
would  destroy  most  of  the  existing  theology 
and  philosophy.  They  indicate  tendencies 
among  scientific  thinkers,  which,  though  prob- 
ably temporary,  must,  before  they  disappear, 
descend  to  lower  strata,  and  reproduce  them- 
selves in  grosser  forms,  and  with  most  serious 
effects  on  the  whole  structure  of  society.  With 
one  class  of  minds  they  constitute  a  sort  of 
religion,  which  so  far  satisfies  the  craving  for 
truth  higher  than  those  which  relate  to  imme- 
diate wants  and  pleasures.  With  another  and 
perhaps  larger  class,  they  are  accepted  as  af- 
fording a  welcome  deliverance  from  all  scruples 
of  conscience  and  fears  of  a  hereafter.     In  the 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  121 

domain  of  science  evolutionism  has  like  ten- 
dencies. It  reduces  the  position  of  man,  who 
becomes  a  descendant  of  inferior  animals,  and 
a  mere  term  in  a  series  whose  end  is  unknown. 
It  removes  from  the  study  of  nature  the  ideas 
,of  final  cause  and  purpose  ;  and  the  evolution- 
ist, instead  of  regarding  the  world  as  a  work 
of  consummate  plan,  skill,  and  adjustment,  ap- 
proaches nature  as  he  would  a  chaos  of  fallen 
rocks,  which  may  present  forms  of  castles,  and 
grotesque  profiles  of  men  and  animals,  but 
they  are  all  fortuitous  and  without  signifi- 
cance." (pp.  317,  318) 

"  Taking,  then,  this  broad  view  of  the  subject, 
two  great  leading  alternatives  are  presented 
to  us.  Either  man  is  an  independent  product 
of  the  will  of  a  Higher  Intelligence,  acting 
directly  or  through  the  laws  and  materials  of 
his  own  institution  and  production,  or  he  has 
been  produced  by  an  unconscious  evolution 
from  lower  things.  It  is  true  that  many  evo- 
lutionists, either  unwilling  to  offend,  or  not 
perceiving  the  logical  consequences  of  their 
own  hypothesis,  endeavor  to  steer  a  middle 
course,  and  to  maintain  that  the  Creator  has 
proceeded  by  way  of  evolution.  But  the  bare, 
hard   logic  of  Spencer,  the    greatest   English 


122  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

authority  on  evolution,  leaves  no  place  for 
this  compromise,  and  shows  that  the  theory, 
carried  out  to  its  legitimate  consequences,  ex- 
cludes the  knowledge  of  a  Creator  and  the 
possibility  of  his  w^ork.  We  have,  therefore, 
to  choose  between  evolution  and  creation, 
bearing  in  mind,  however,  that  there  may  be 
a  place  in  nature  for  evolution,  properly  lim- 
ited, as  well  as  for  other  things,  and  that  the 
idea  of  creation  by  no  means  excludes  law  and 
second  causes."  (p.  321) 

"  It  may  be  said,  that  evolution  may  be  held 
as  a  scientific  doctrine  in  connection  with  a 
modified  belief  in  creation.  The  work  of  act- 
ual creation  may  have  been  limited  to  a  few 
elementary  types,  and  evolution  may  have 
done  the  rest.  Evolutionists  may  still  be  the- 
jsts.  We  have  already  seen  that  the  doctrine, 
as  carried  out  to  its  logical  consequences,  ex- 
cludes creation  and  theism.  It  may,  however, 
be  shown  that  even  in  its  more  modified  form, 
and  when  held  by  men  who  maintain  that  they 
are  not  atheists,  it  is  practically  atheistic,  be- 
cause excluding  the  idea  of-  plan  and  design, 
and  resolving  all  things  into  the  action  of  un- 
intelligent forces.  It  is  necessary  to  observe 
this,  because    it  is  the   half-wav-evolutionism. 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  123 

v.'liich  professes  to  have  a  creator  somewhere 
behind  it,  that  is  most  popular ;  though  it  is, 
if  possible,  more  unphilosophical  than  that 
which  professes  to  set  out  with  absolute  and 
determined  nonentity,  or  from  self-existing  star- 
dust  containing  all  the  possibilities  of  the  uni- 
verse." 

In  reference  to  the  objection  of  evolutionists, 
that  the  origin  of  every  new  species,  on  the 
theistic  doctrine,  supposes  "  a  miracle,"  an  in- 
tervention of  the  divine  efficie;icy  without  the 
agency  of  second  causes,'  Principal  Dawson 
asks,  '^  What  is  the  actual  statement  of  the 
theory  of  creation  as  it  may  be  held  by  a  mod- 
ern man  of  science  ?  Simply  this :  that  all 
things  have  been  produced  by  the  Supreme 
Creative  will,  acting  either  directly,  or  through 
the  agency  of  the  forces  and  material  of  his 
own  production."  (p.  340) 

He  thus  sums  up  his  argument  against  the 
doctrine  of  evolution,  specially  in  its  applica- 
tion to  man  :  "  Finally,  the  evolutionist  picture 
wants  some  of  the  fairest  lineaments  of  human- 
ity, and  cheats  us  with  the  semblance  of  man 
without  the  reality.  Shave  and  paint  your 
ape  as  you  may,  clothe  him  and  set  him  up 
upon  his  feet,  still  he  fails  greatly  of  the  *  hu- 


124  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM f 

man  form  divine ; '  and  so  it  is  with  him  mor- 
ally and  spiritually  as  well.  We  have  seen 
that  he  wants  the  instinct  of  immortality,  the 
love  of  God,  the  mental  and  spiritual  power  of 
exercising  dominion  over  the  earth.  The  very 
agency  by  which  he  is  evolved  is  of  itself  sub- 
versive of  all  these  higher  properties ;  the 
struggle  for  existence  is  essentially  selfish,  and, 
therefore,  degrading.  Even  in  the  lower  ani- 
mals, it  is  a  false  assumption  that  its  tendency 
is  to  elevate  ;  for  animals,  when  driven  to  the 
utmost  verge  of  the  struggle  for  life,  become 
depauperated  and  degraded.  The  dog  which 
spends  its  life  in  snarling  contention  with  its 
fellow  curs  for  insufficient  food,  will  not  be  a 
noble  specimen  of  its  race.  God  does  not  so 
treat  his  creatures.  There  is  far  more  truth 
to  nature  in  the  doctrine  which  represents  Him 
as  listening  to  the  young  ravens  when  they  cry 
for  food.  But  as  applied  to  man,  the  theory 
of  the  struggle  for  existence,  and  survival  of 
the  fittest,  though  the  most  popular  phase  of 
evolutionism  at  present,  is  nothing  less  than 
the  basest  and  most  horrible  of  superstitions. 
It  makes  man  not  merely  carnal  but  devilish. 
It  takes  his  lowest  appetites  and  propensities, 
and   makes   them   his  God  and  Creator.     His 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  125 

higher  sentiments  and  aspirations,  his  self- 
denying  philanthropy,  his  enthusiasm  for  the 
good  and  true,  all  the  struggles  and  suiFerings 
of  heroes  and  martyrs,  not  to  speak  of  that 
self-sacrifice  which  is  the  foundation  of  Chris- 
tianity, are,  in  the  view  of  the  evolutionist, 
mere  loss  and  waste,  failure  in  the  struggle  of 
life.  What  does  he  give  us  in  exchange  ?  An 
endless  pedigree  of  bestial  ancestors,  without 
one  gleam  of  high  and  holy  tradition  to  enliven 
the  procession  ;  and  for  the  future,  the  pros- 
pect that  the  poor  mass  of  protoplasm,  which 
constitutes  the  sum  of  our  being,  and  which  is 
the  sole  gain  of  an  indefinite  struggle  in  the 
past,  must  soon  be  resolved  again  into  inferior 
animals  or  dead  matter.  That  men  of  thought 
and  culture  should  advocate  such  a  philosophy, 
argues  either  a  strange  mental  hallucination, 
or  that  the  higher  spiritual  nature  has  been 
wholly  quenched  within  them.  It  is  one  of 
the  saddest  of  many  sad  spectacles  which  our 
age  presents."  (p.  395) 

Relation  of  Darwinism  to  Religion. 

The  consideration  of  that  subject  would  lead 
into  the  wide  field  of  the  relation  between  sci- 
ence and  religion.    Into  that  field  we  lack  com- 


126  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

petency  and  time  to  enter ;  a  few  remarks,  how- 
ever, on  the  subject  may  not  be  out  of  place. 
Those  remarks,  we  woukl  fain  make  in  a 
humble  way  irenical.  There  is  need  of  an 
Irenicum,  for  the  fact  is  painfully  notorious 
that  there  is  an  antagonism  between  scientific 
men  as  a  class,  and  religious  men  as  a  class. 
Of  course  this  opposition  is  neither  felt  nor  ex- 
pressed b}''  all  on  either  side.  Nevertheless, 
whatever  may  be  the  cause  of  this  antagonism, 
or  Avhoever  are  to  be  blamed  for  it,  there  can 
be  no  doubt  that  it  exists  and  that  it  is  an 
evil. 

The  first  cause  of  the  alienation  in  question 
is,  that  the  two  parties,  so  to  speak,  adopt  dif- 
ferent rules  of  evidence,  and  thus  can  hardly 
avoid  arriving  at  different  conclusions.  To  un- 
derstand this  we  must  determine  what  is  meant 
by  science,  and  by  scientific  evidence.  Sci- 
ence, according  to  its  etymology,  is  simply 
knowledge.  But  usage  has  limited  its  mean- 
ing, in  the  first  place,  not  to  the  knowledge  of, 
facts  or  phenomena,  merely,  but  to  their  causes 
and  relations.  It  was  said  of  old,  "  on  scientige 
fundamentum,  Siori  fastigium."  No  amount  of 
materials  would  constitute  a  building.  They 
must  be  duly  arranged  so  as  to  make  a  sym- 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  127 

metrical  whole.  No  amount  of  disconnected 
data  can  constitute  a  science.  Those  data  must 
be  systematized  in  their  relation  to  each  other 
and  to  other  things.  In  the  second  place,  the 
word  is  becoming  more  and  more  restricted  to 
the  knowledge  of  a  particular  class  of  facts,  and 
of  their  relations,  namely,  the  facts  of  nature 
or  of  the  external  world.  This  usage  is  not 
universal,  nor  is  it  fixed.  In  Germany,  espec- 
ially, the  word  Wissenschaft  is  used  of  all  kinds 
of  ordered  knowledge,  whether  transcendental 
or  empirical.  So  we  are  accustomed  to  speak 
of  mental,  moral,  social,  as  well  as  of  natural 
science.  Nevertheless,  the  more  restricted  use 
of  the  word  is  very  common  and  very  influ- 
ential. It  is  important  that  this  fact  should 
be  recognized.  In  common  usage,  a  scientific 
man  is  distinguished  specially  from  a  metaphy- 
sician. The  one  investigates  the  phenomena 
of  matter,  the  other  studies  the  phenomena  of 
mind,  according  to  the  old  distinction  between 
physics  and  metaphysics.  Science,  therefore, ' 
is  the  ordered  knowledge  of  the  phenomena 
which  we  recognize  through  tlie  senses.  A 
scientific  fact  is  a  fact  perceived  by  the  senses.) 
Scientific  evidence  is  evidence  addressed  to  the] 
senses.     At  one  of  the  meetings  of  the  Victoria 


128  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

Institute,  a  visitor  avowed  his  disbelief  in  the 
existence  of  God.  When  asked,  what  kind  of 
evidence  would  satisfy  him  ?  he  answered.  Just 
such  evidence  as  I  have  of  the  existence  of 
this  tumbler  which  I  now  hold  in  my  hand. 
The  Rev.  Mr.  Henslow  says,  "By  science  is 
meant  the  investigation  of  facts  and  phenomena 
recognizable  by  the  senses,  and  of  the  causes 
which  have  brought  them  into  existence."  ^ 
This  is  the  main  root  of  the  trouble.  If  science 
be  the  knowledge  of  the  facts  perceived  by  the 
senses,  and  scientific  evidence,  evidence  ad- 
dressed to  the  senses,  then  the  senses  are  the 
I  only  sources  of  knowledge.  Any  conviction 
resting  on  any  other  ground  than  the  testi- 
mony of  the  senses,  must  be  faith.  Darwin  ad- 
mits that  the  contrivances  in  nature  may  be  ac- 
counted for  by  assuming  that  they  are  due  to 
design  on  the  part  of  God.  But,  he  says,  that 
would  not  be  science.  Haeckel  says  that  to 
science  matter  is  eternal.  If  any  man  chooses 
to  say,  it  was  created,  well  and  good  ;  but  that 
is  a  matter  of  faith,  and  faith  is  imagination. 
Ulrici  quotes  a  distinguished  German  physiolo- 

^  Science  and  Scripture  not  Antagonistic,  because  Distinct  in 
their  Spheres  of  Thought.  A  Lecture,  by  Rev.  George  Henslow, 
M.  A.,  F.  L.  S.,    F.  G.  S.      London,  1873,  p.  I. 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  129 

gist  who  believes  in  vital,  as  distinguished 
from  physical  forces  ;  but  he  holds  to  sponta- 
neous generation,  not,  as  he  admits,  because  it 
has  been  proved,  but  because  the  admission  of 
any  higher  power  than  nature  is  unscientific' 

It  is  inevitable  that  minds  addicted  to  scien- 
tific investigation  should  receive  a  strong  bias 
to  undervalue  any  other  kind  of  evidence  ex- 
cept that  of  the  senses,  i.  e.,  scientific  evidence. 
We  have  seen  that  those  who  give  themselves 
up  to  this  tendency  come  to  deny  God,  to 
deny  mind,  to  deny  even  self.  It  is  true  that 
the  great  majority  of  men,  scientific  as  well  as 
others,  are  so  much  under  the  control  of  the 
laws  of  their  nature,  that  they  cannot  go  to 
this  extreme.  The  tendenc}^,  however,  of  a 
mind  addicted  to  the  consideration  of  one  kind 
of  evidence,  to  become  more  or  less  insensible 
to  other  kinds  of  proof,  is  undeniable.  Thus 
even  Agassiz,  as  a  zoologist  and  simply  on 
zoological  grounds,  assumed  that  there  were 
several  zones  between  the  Ganges  and  the  At- 
lantic Ocean,  each  having  its  own  flora  and 
fauna,  and  inhabited  by  races  of  men,  the  same 
in  kind,  but  of  different  origins.  When  told 
by  the  comparative  philologists  that  this  was 

1  Goti  und  Na!ur,  p.  200. 
9 


,130  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

impossible,  because  the  languages  spoken 
through  that  wide  region,  demonstrated  that 
its  inhabitants  must  have  had  a  common  de- 
scent, he  could  only  answer  that  as  ducks 
quack  everywhere,  he  could  not  see  why  men 
should  not  everywhere  speak  the  same  lan- 
guage. 

A  still  inore  striking  illustration  is  furnished 
by  Dr.  Lionel  Beale,  the  distinguished  English 
physiologist.  He  has  written  a  book  of  three 
hundred  and  eighty-eight  pages  for  the  express 
purpose  of  proving  that  the  phenomena  of  life, 
instinct,  and  intellect  cannot  be  referred  to  any 
known  natural  forces.  He  avows  his  belief  that 
in  nature  "  mind  governs  matter,"  and  "in  the 
existence  of  a  never-changing,  all-seeing,  power- 
directing  and  matter-guiding  Omnipotence." 
He  avows  his  faith  in  miracles,  and  "  those  mir- 
acles on  which  Christianity  is  founded."  Nev- 
ertheless, his  faith  in  all  these  points  is  provi- 
sional. He  says  that  a  truly  scientific  man,  "  if 
the  maintenance,  continuity,  and  nature  of  life 
on  our  planet  should  at  some  future  time  be 
fully  explained  without  supposing  the  existence 
of  any  such  supernatural  omnipotent  influence, 
would  be  bound  to  receive  the  new  explana- 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  131 

tion,  and  might  abax^-clon  the  old  conviction."  ^ 
That  is,  all  evidence  ot"  the  truths  of  religion 
not  founded  on  nature  and  perceived  by  the 
senses,  amounts  to  nothing. 

Now  as  religion  does  not  rest  on  the  testi- 
mony of  the  senses,  that  is  on  scientific  evi- 
dence, the  tendency  of  scientific  men  is  to 
ignore  its  claims.  We  speak  only  of  tendency. 
We  rejoice  to  know  or  believe  that  in  hundreds 
or  thousands  of  scientific  men,  this  tendency  is 
counteracted  by  their  consciousness  of  man- 
hood —  the  conviction  that  the  body  is  not  the 
man,  —  by  the  intuitions  of  the  reason  and 
the  conscience,  and  by  the  grace  of  God.  No 
class  of  men  stands  deservedly  higher  in  public 
estimation  than  men  of  science,  Avho,  while  re- 
maining faithful  to  their  higher  nature,  have 
enlarcy-ed  our  knowledge  of  the  wonderful 
wo,Yks  of  God. 

A  second  cause  of  the  alienation  between 
science  and  religion,  is  the  failure  to  make  the 
due  distinction  between  facts  and  the  explana- 
tion of  those  facts,  or  the  theories  deduced 
from  them.     No  sound   minded  man  disputes 

1  Protoplasm;  or,  Matter  and  Life.     By  Lionel   S.  Beale,  M. 
•  B.,  F.  R.    S.     Third  edition.     London  &  Philadelphia,   1874, 
p.  845  ;  and  the  whole  chapter  on  Design. 


132  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

any  scientific  fact.     Religious  men  believe  with 
f  Agassiz  that  facts  are  sacred.     They  are  reve- 
i  lations  from  God .     Christians  sacrifice  to  them, 
when  duly  authenticated,  their  most  cherished 
convictions.     That  the   earth  moves,  no  relig- 
ious man  doubts.     When    Galileo   made    that 
great  discovery,  the  Church  was  right  in  not 
yielding  at  once  to  the  evidence  of  an  experi- 
ment which  it  did  not  understand.     But  when 
the  fact  was   clearly  established,  no  man  sets 
np  his  interpretation  of  the  Bible  in  opposition 
to  it.     Religious  men  admit  all  the  facts  con- 
nected with  our  solar  system ;  all  the  facts  of 
geology,  and  of  comparative  anatomy,  and  of 
biology.     Ought   not   this  to  satisfy  scientific 
men  ?     Must  we  also  admit  their  explanations 
and  inferences  ?     If  we  admit  that  the  human 
embryo  passes  through  various   phases,^  must 
we  admit  that  man  was  once  a  fish,  then  a  Bi'jd, 
then  a  dog,  then  an  ape,  and  finally  what  he 
now  is  ?     If  we  admit  the  similarity  of  struc- 
ture in  all  vertebrates,  must  w^e  admit  the  evo- 
lution  of  one   from   another,  and    all  from  a 
primordial   germ  ?     It   is   to    be    remembered 
;;that  the  facts  are  from  God,  the  explanation 
I  from  men  ;  and  the  two  are  often  as  far  apart 
ks  Heaven  and  its  an  tip  ode. 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM f  133 

These  human  explanations  are  not  only 
without  authority,  but  they  are  very  mutable. 
They  change  not  only  from  generation  to  gen- 
eration, but  almost  as  often  as  the  phases  of 
the  moon.  It  is  a  fact  that  the  planets  move. 
Once  it  was  said  that  they  were  moved  by 
spirits,  then  by  vortexes,  now  by  self-evolved 
forces.  It  is  hard  that  we  should  be  called  upon 
to  change  our  faith  with  every  new  moon.  The 
same  man  sometimes  propounds  theories  almost 
as  rapidly  as  the  changes  of  the  kaleidoscope. 
The  amiable  Sir  Charles  Lyell,  England's 
most  distinguished  geologist,  has  published 
ten  editions  of  his  "  Principles  of  Geology,'* 
which  so  differ  as  to  make  it  hard  to  believe 
that  it  is  the  work  of  the  same  mind.  "  In  all 
the  editions  up  to  the  tenth,  he  looked  upon 
geological  facts  and  geological  phenomena  as 
proving  the  fixity  of  species  and  their  special 
creation  in  time.  In  the  tenth  edition,  just 
published,  he  announces  his  change  of  opinion 
on  this  subject  and  his  conversion  to  the  doc- 
trine of  development  by  law."  ^  "In  the  eighth 
edition  of  his  work,"  says  Dr.  Bree,  "  Sir 
Charles    Lyell,   the   Nestor   of   geologists,    to 

1  Fallacies  in  the  Hypothesis  of  Mr.  Darwin^  by  C.  R.  Bree, 
M.  D.,  F.  Z.  S.     London,  1872,  p.  290. 


134  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

whom  the  present  generation  is  more  indebted 
than  to  any  other  for  all  that  is  known  of  geol- 
ogy in  its  advanced  stage,  teaches  that  species 
have  a  real  existence  in  nature,  and  that  each 
was  endowed  at  the  time  of  its  creation  with 
the  attributes  and  organization  by  which  it  is 
now  distinguished."  The  change  on  the  part 
of  this  eminent  geologist,  it  is  to  be  observed, 
is  a  mere  change  of  opinion.  There  was  no 
change  of  the  facts  of  geology  between  the 
publication  of  the  eighth  and  of  the  tenth  edi- 
tion of  his  work,  neither  was  there  any  change 
in  his  knowledge  of  those  facts.  All  the  facts 
relied  upon  by  evolutionists,  have  long  been 
familiar  to  scientific  men.  The  whole  change 
is  a  subjective  one.  One  year  the  veteran 
geologist  thinks  the  facts  teach  one  thing, 
another  year  he  thinks  they  teach  another. 
It  is  now  the  fact,  and  it  is  feared  it  will  con- 
tinue to  be  a  fact,  that  scientific  men  give 
the  name  of  science  to  their  explanations  as 
well  as  to  the  facts.  Nay,  they  are  often,  and 
naturally,  more  zealous  for  their  explanations 
than  they  are  for  the  facts.  The  facts  are 
God's,  the  explanations  are  their  own. 

The  third  cause  of  the  alienation  between 
religion  and  science,  is  the  bearing  of  scientific 


WHAT  JS  DARWINISM f  135 

men  towards  the  men  of  culture  who  do  not 
belong  to  their  own  class.  AVhen  we,  in  such 
connections,  speak  of  scientific  men,  we  do  not 
mean  men  of  science  as  such,  but  those  only 
who  avow  or  manifest  their  hostility  to  relig- 
ion. There  is  an  assumption  of  superiority, 
and  often  a  manifestation  of  contemjDt.  Those 
who  call  their  logic  or  their  conjectures  into 
question,  are  stigmatized  as  narrow-minded, 
bigots,  old  women,  Bible  worshippers,  etc. 

Professor  Huxley's  advice  to  metaphysicians 
and  theologians  is,  to  let  science  alone.  This  is 
his  Irenicum.  But  do  he  and  his  associates  let 
metaphysics  and  religion  alone  ?  They  tell  the 
metaphysician  that  his  vocation  is  gone  ;  there 
is  no  such  thing  as  mind,  and  of  course  no 
mental  laws  to  be  established.  Metaphysics 
are  merged  into  physics.  Professor  Huxley 
tells  the  reliirious  world  that  there  is  over- 
whelming  and  crushing  evidence  (scientific 
evidence,  of  course)  that  no  event  has  ever 
Occurred  on  this  earth  which  was  not  the  effect 
of  natural  causes.  Hence  there  have  been  no 
miracles,  and  Christ  is  not  risen.^    He  says  that 

1  Wlien  Professor  Huxley  says,  as  quoted  above,  that  he  does 
not  deny  the  possibility  of  miracles,  he  must  use  the  word  mir- 
acle in  a  sense  peculiar  to  himself. 


136  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

the  doctrine  that  beUef  in  a  personalGod  is 
necessary  to  any  rehgion  worthy  of  the  name, 
is  a  mere  matter  of  opinion.  Tyndall,  Carpen- 
ter, and  Henry  Thompson,  teach  that  prayer  is 
a  superstitious  absurdity ;  Herbert  Spencer, 
whom  they  call  their  "  great  philosopher," 
i.  e.,  the  man  who  does  their  thinking,  labors 
to  prove  that  there  cannot  be  a  personal  God, 
or  human  soul  or  self;  that  moral  laws  are  mere 
"  generalizations  of  utility,"  or,  as  Carl  Vogt 
says,  that  self  respect,  and  not  the  will  of  God, 
is  the  ground  and  rule  of  moral  obligation.  If 
any  protest  be  made  against  such  doctrines,  we 
are  told  that  scientific  truth  cannot  be  put 
down  by  denunciation  (or  as  Vogt  says,  by 
barking).  So  doubtless  the  Pharisees,  when 
our  blessed  Lord  called  them  hypocrites  and  a 
generation  of  vipers,  and  said :  "  Ye  compass 
sea  and  land  to  make  one  proselyte ;  and  when 
he  is  made,  ye  make  him  twofold  inore  the 
child  of  hell  than  yourselves,"  doubtless 
thought  that  that  was  a  poor  way  to  refuts 
their  theory,  that  holiness  and  salvation  were 
to  be  secured  by  church-membership  and 
church-rites.  Nevertheless,  as  those  words 
were  the  words  of  Christ,  they  were  a  thun- 
derbolt which  reverberates  through  all  time  and 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  137 

space,  and  still  makes  Pharisees  of  every  name 
and  nation  tremble.  Huxley's  Irenicum  will 
not  do.  Men  who  are  assiduously  poisoning 
the  fountains  of  religion,  morality,  and  social 
order,  cannot  be  let  alone. 

Haeckel's  Irenicum  amounts  to  much  the 
same  as  that  of  Professor  Huxley.  He  forbids 
the  right  to  speak  on  these  vital  subjects,  to  all 
who  are  not  thoroughly  versed  in  biology,  and 
who  are  not  entirely  emancipated  from  the 
trammels  of  their  long  cherished  traditional  be- 
liefs.^ This,  as  the  whole  context  shows,  means 
that  a  man  in  order  to  be  entitled  to  be  heard 
on  the  evolution  theory,  must  be  willing  to  re- 
nounce his  faith  not  only  in  the  Bible,  but  in 

^  Jenaer  Literaturzeitung,  January  3,  1874.  In  this  number 
there  is  a  notice  by  Doctor  Haeckel  of  two  books,  — Descend- 
enzlehre  und  Darwinismus,  von  Oscar  Schmidt,  Leipzig,  1873; 
and  Die  Fortschrille  des  Darwlnismus,  von  J.  W.  Spengel,  Coin 
and  Leipzig,  1874  ;  in  which  he  says  :  "  Erstens,  um  in  Sachen 
der  Descendenz-Theorie  mitreden  zu  konnen,  ein  gewisser  Grad 
von  tieferer  biologischer  (sowohl  morphologischer  als  physiolo- 
gischer)  Bildung  unentbchrlich,  den  die  meisten  von  jenen 
Auctoren  (the  opposers  of  the  theory)  nicht  besitzen.  Zweitens 
ist  fiir  ein  klares  und  zutreffendes  Urtheil  in  diesem  Sachen 
eine  riicksichtslose  Ilingabe  an  veriiunftgemasse  Erkenntniss 
und  eine  dadurch  bedingte  Resignation  auf  uralte,  liebgewor- 
dene  und  tief  vererbte  Vorurtheile  erforderhch,  zu  welcher  sich 
die  wenigsten  entschliesen  konnen." 


138  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

God,  ill  the  soul,  in  a  future  life,  and  become  a 
monistic  materialist.^ 

It  is  very  reasonable  that  scientific  men, 
in  common  with  lawyers  and  physicians  and 
other  professional  men,  should  feel  themselves 
entitled  to  be  heard  with  special  deference  on 

^  In  his  Natiirlijiclie  Schopfungsgeschichte,  Haeckel  is  still  more 
exclusive.  When  he  comes  to  answer  the  objections  to  the  evo- 
lution, or,  as  he  commonly  calls  it,  the  descendence  theory,  he 
dismisses  the  objections  derived  from  religion,  as  unworthy  of 
notice,  with  the  remark  that  all  Glaube  ist  Aberglaube ;  all  faith 
is  superstition.  The  objections  from  a  priori,  or  intuitive  truths, 
are  disposed  of  in  an  equally  summary  manner,  by  denying  that 
there  are  any  such  truths,  and  asserting  that  all  our  knowledge 
is  from  the  senses.  The  objection  that  so  many  distinguished 
naturalists  reject  the  theory,  he  considers  more  at  length.  First, 
many  have  grown  old  in  another  way  of  thinking  and  cannot  be 
expected  to  change.  Second,  many  are  collectors  of  facts, 
without  studying  their  relations,  or  are  destitute  of  the  genius  for 
generalization.  No  amount  of  material  makes  a  building.  Others, 
again,  are  specialists.  It  is  not  enough  that  a  man  should  be 
versed  in  one  department ;  he  must  be  at  home  in  all :  in  Botany, 
Zoology,  Comparative  Anatomy,  Biology,  Geology,  and  Paleon- 
tology. He  must  be  able  to  survey  the  whole  field.  Fourthly, 
and  mainly,  naturalists  are  generally  lamentably  deficient  in 
philosophical  culture  and  in  a  philosophical  spirit.  "  The  im- 
movable edifice  of  the  true,  monistic  science,  or  what  is  the  same 
thing,  natural  science,  can  only  arise  through  the  most  intimate 
interaction  and  mutual  interpenetration  of  philosophy  and  obser- 
vation (Philosophie  und  Empiric). "  pp.  (338-641.  It  is  only 
a  select  few,  therefore,  of  learned  and  philosophical  monistic 
materialists,  who  are  entitled  to  be  heard  on  questions  of  the 
highest  moment  to  every  individual  man,  and  to  human  society. 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  139 

subjects  belonging  to  their  respective  depart- 
ments. This  deference  no  one  is  disposed  to 
deny  to  men  of  science.  But  it  is  to  be 
remembered  that  no  department  of  human 
knowledge  is  isolated.  One  runs  into  and 
overlaps  another.  We  have  abundant  evidence 
that  the  devotees  of  natural  science  are  not 
willing  to  confine  themselves  to  the  depart- 
ment of  nature,  in  the  common  sense  of  that 
word.  They  not  only  speculate,  but  dogma- 
tize, on  the  highest  questions  of  philosophy, 
morahty,  and  religion.  And  further,  admitting 
the  special  claims  to  deference  on  the  part  of 
scientific  men,  other  men  have  their  rights. 
They  have  the  right  to  judge  of  the  consistency 
of  the  assertions  of  men  of  science  and  of  the 
logic  of  their  reasoning.  They  have  the  right  to 
set  off  the  testimony  of  one  or  more  experts 
against  the  testimony  pf  others;  and  espe- 
cially, they  have  the  right  to  reject  all  specu- 
lations, hypotheses,  and  theories,  which  come 
in  conflict  with  well  established  truths.  It  is; 
ground  of  profound  gratitude  to  God  that  Hel 
has  given  to  the  human  mind  intuitions  which 
are  infalliblej,_laws  of  belief  which  men  cannot! 
disregard  any  more  than  the  laws  of  nature, 
and  also  convictions  produced  by  the  Spirit  of  1 


140  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM f 

God  which  no  sophistry  of  man  can  weaken. 
These  are  barriers  which  no  man  can  pass  with- 
out plunging  into  the  abyss  of  outer  darkness. 

If  there  be  any  truth  in  the  preceding  re- 
marks, then  it  is  obvious  that  there  can  be  no 
harmony  between  science  and  rehgion  until 
the  evils  referred  to  be  removed.  Scientific 
men  must  come  to  recognize  practically,  and 
not  merely  in  words,  that  there  are  other  kinds 
of  evidence  of  truth  than  the  testimony  of  the 
senses.  They  must  come  to  give  due  weight 
to  the  testimony  of  consciousness,  and  to  the 
intuitions  of  the  reason  and  conscience.  They 
must  cease  to  require  the  deference  due  to  es- 
tablished facts  to  be  paid  to  their  speculations 
and  explanations.  And  they  must  treat  their 
fellow-men  with  due  respect.  The  Pharisees 
said  to  the  man  whose  sight  had  been  restored 
by  Christ,  "  Thou  wast  altogether  born  in  sin, 
and  dost  thou  teach  us !  "  Men  of  science 
must  not  speak  thus.  They  must  not  say  to 
every  objector,  Thou  art  not  scientific,  and 
therefore  hast  no  right  to  speak.  The  true 
Irenicum  is  for  all  parties  to  give  due  heed  to 
such  words  as  these,  "  If  any  man  would  be 
wise,  let  him  become  a  fool,  that  he  may  be 
wise ;  "  or  these,  "  Be  converted,  and  become 


-   WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  141 

as  little  children;"  or  these,  "The  Spirit  of 
Truth  shall  guide  you  in  all  truth."  We  are 
willing  to  hear  this  called  cant.  Nevertheless, 
these  latter  words  fell  from  the  lips  of  Him 
who  spake  as  never  man  spake. 

So  much,  and  it  is  very  little,  on  the  general 
question  of  the  relation  of  science  to  religion. 
But  what  is  to  be  thought  of  the  special  rela- 
tion of  Mr.  Darwin's  theory  to  the  truths  of 

natural  and  revealed  reliarion  ?     We   have  al-  i 

... 
ready  seen  that  Darwinism  includes  the  three  ) 

elements,  evolution,  natural  selection,  and  the  | 
denial jof  design  in  nature.     These  points,  how- 
ever, cannot  now  be  considered  separately. 
yit  is  conceded  that  a  man  may  be  an  evolu-   \i 
tionist  and  yet  not  be  an  atheist  and  may  admit  J 
of  desio;n  in  nature.     But  we  cannot  see  how   ,• 
the  theory  of  evolution  can  .be  reconciled  with  f  I 
\the  declarations  of  the  Scriptures.    Others  may  y. 
see  it,  and  be  able  to  reconcile  their  allegiance   I 
to  science  with  their  allegiance  to  the  Bible.  ' 
Professor  Huxley,  as  we  have  seen,  pronounces 
the  thing  impossible.    As  all  error  is  antagonis- 
tic to  truth,  if  the  evolution  theory  be  false,  it 
must  be  opposed  to  the  truths  of  religion  so  far 
as  the  two  come  into  contact.    Mr.  Henslow,  in- 
deed, says  Science  and  Religion  are  not  antag- 


142  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

onistic  because  they  are  in  different  spheres  of 
thought.  This  is  often  said  by  men  who  do  not 
admit  that  there  is  any  thought  at  all  in  relig- 
■ion ;  that  it  is  merely  a  matter  of  feeling.  The 
fact,  however,  is  that  religion  is  a  system  of 
j  knowledge,  as  well  as  a  state  of  feeling.  The 
truths  on  which  all  religion  is  founded  are 
drawn  within  the  domain  of  science,  the  nature 
of  the  first  cause,  its  relation  to  the  world, 
the  nature  of  second  causes,  the  origin  of  life, 
anthropology,  including  the  origin,  nature,  and 
destiny  of  man.  Religion  has  to  fight  for  its 
^  life  against  a  large  class  of  scientific  men.  All 
attempts  to  prevent  her  exercising  her  right 
to  be  heard  are  unreasonable  and  vain. 

It  should  be  premised  that  this  paper  was 
/written  for  the    single  purpose    of  answering 
/  the  question.  What  is   Darwinism  ?     The  dis- 
/  cussion   of  the  merits  of  the  theory  was  not 
I  within  the  scope  of  the  writer.     What  follows, 
I   therefore,  is  to  be  considered  only  in  the  light 
/    of  a  practical  conclusion. 
,^    1.    The  first  objection  to  the    theory  is   its 
^^^rlmd  fade  incredibility.     That  a  single  plant 
or  animal  should  be  developed  from  a  mere  cell, 
is  such  a  wonder,  that  nothing  but  daily  obser- 
vation of  the  fact  could  induce  any  man  to  be- 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  143 

lieve  it.  Let  any  one  ask  himself,  suppose 
this  fact  was  not  thus  famiHar,  what  amount 
of  speculation,  of  arguments  from  analogies, 
possibilities,  and  probabilities,  could  avail  to 
produce  conviction  of  its  truth.  But  who  can 
believe  that  all  the  plants  and  animals  which 
have  ever  existed  upon  the  face  of  the  earth, 
have  been  evolved  from  one  such  germ  ?  This 
is  Darwin's  doctrine.  We  are  aware  that  this 
apparent  impossibility  is  evaded  by  the  be- 
lievers in  spontaneous  generation,  who  hold 
that  such  germ  cells  may  be  produced  any- 
where and  at  all  times.  But  this  is  not  Dar- 
winism. Darwin  wants  us  to  believe  that  all 
living  things,  from  the  lowly  violet  to  the  giant 
redwoods  of  California,  from  the  microscopic 
animalcule  to  the  .Mastodon,  the  Dinotherium, 
—  monsters  the  very  description  of  which  fill  us 
with  horror,  —  bats  with  wings  twenty  feet  in 
breadth,  flying  dragons,  tortoises  ten  feet  high 
and  eighteen  feet  long,  etc.,  etc.,  came  one  and 
all  from  the  same  primordial  germ.  This  de- 
mand is  the  more  unreasonable  when  we  re- 
member that  these  living  creatures  are  not 
only  so  different,  but  are,  as  to  plants  and  ani- 
mals, directly  opposed  in  their  functions.  The 
function  of  the  plant,  as  biologists  express  it,  is 


144  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM f 

to  produce  force,  that  of  the  animal  to  expend 
it.  The  plant,  in  virtue  of  a  power  peculiar  to 
itself,  which  no  art  or  skill  of  man  can  imitate, 
transmutes  dead  inorganic  matter  into  organic 
matter,  suited  to  the  sustenance  of  animal  life, 
and  without  which  animals  cannot  live.  The 
gulf,  therefore,  between  the  plant  and  animal 
would  seem  to  be  impassable. 

Further,  the  variations  by  which  the  change 
of  species  is  effected  are  so  trifling  as  often  to 
be  imperceptible,  and  their  accumulation  of 
them  so  slow  as  to  evade  notice,  —  the  time 
requisite  to  accomplish  any  marked  change  must 
be  counted  by  millions,  or  milliards  of  years. 
Here  is  another  demand  on  our  credulity. 
The  apex  is  reached  when  we  are  told  that  all 
these  transmutations  are  effected  by  chance, 
that  is,  without  purpose  or  intention,  ^^aking 
all  these  things  into  consideration,  we  think  it 
may,  with  moderation,  be  said,  that  a  more 
absolutely  incredible  theory  was  never  pro- 
pounded for  acceptance  among  men?> 

2.  There  is  no  pretence  that  the  theory  can 
be  proved.  Mr.  Darwin  does  not  pretend  to 
prove  it.  He  admits  that  all  the  facts  in  the 
case  can  be  accounted  for  on  the  assumption  of 
divine  purpose  and  control.     All  that  he  claims 


WHAT  TS  DARWINISM?  145 

for  his  theory  is  that  it  is  possible.  His  mode 
of  arguing  is  that  if  we  suppose  this  and  that, 
then  it  may  have  happened  thus  and  so. 
Amiable  and  attractive  as  the  man  presents 
himself  in  his  writings,  it  rouses  indignation,  in 
one  class  at  least  of  his  readers,  to  see  him  by 
such  a  mode  of  arguing  reaching  conclusions 
which  are  subversive  of  the  fundamental  truths 
of  religion. 

3.  Another  fact  cannot  fail  to  attract  atten- 
tion. When  the  theory  of  evolution  was  pro- 
pounded in  1844  in  the  ''  Vestiges  of  Creation," 
it  was  universally  rejected  ;  when  proposed  by 
Mr.  Darwin,  less  than  twenty  years  afterward,  it 
was  received  with  acclamation.  Why  is  this  ? 
The  facts  are  now  what  they  were  then.  They 
were  as  well  known  then  as  they  are  now.  The 
theory,  so  far  as  evolution  is  concerned,  was 
then  just  what  it  is  now.  How  then  is  it,  that 
what  was  scientifically  false  in  1844  is  scien- 
tifically true  in  1864  ?  When  a  drama  is  in- 
troduced in  a  theatre  and  universally  con- 
demned, and  a  little  while  afterward,  with  a 
little  change  in  the  scenery,  it  is  received  with 
rapturous  applause,  the  natural  conclusion  is, 
that  the  change  is  in  the  audience  and  not  in 
the  drama. 

10 


146  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

There  is  only  one  cause  for  the  fact  referred 
to,  that  we  can  think  of  The  "  Vestiges  of  Cre- 
ation "  did  not  expressly  or  effectually  exclude 
design.  Darwin  does.  This  is  a  reason  as- 
signed by  the  most  zealous  advocates  of  his 
theory  for  their  adoption  of  it.  This  is  the  rea- 
son given  by  Biichner,  by  Haeckel,  and  by 
Vogt.  It  is  assigned  also  in  express  terms  by 
Strauss,  the  announcement  of  whose  death  has 
diffused  a  feeling  of  sadness  over  all  who  were 
acquainted  with  his  antecedents.  In  his  last 
work,  "  The  Old  Faith  and  the  New,"  he  admits 
"  that  Darwin's  doctrine  is  a  mere  hypothesis  ; 
that  it  leaves  the  main  points  unexplained 
(Die  Hupt-und  Cardinal-punkte  noch  unerklart 
sind) ;  nevertheless,  as  he  has  shown  how 
miracles  may  be  excluded,  he  is  to  be  ap- 
plauded as  one  of  the  greatest  benefactors  of 
the  human  race."  (p.  177)  By  "  Wunder," 
or  miracle,  Strauss  means  any  event  for  which 
natural  causes  are  insufficient  to  account.  "  We 
philosophers  and  critical  theologians,"  he  says, 
•'  have  spoken  well  when  we  decreed  the  abo- 
lition of  miracles ;  but  our  decree  (macht- 
spruch)  remained  without  effect,  because  we 
could  not  show  them  to  be  unnecessary,  inas- 
much as  we  were  unable  to  indicate  any  nat- 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  147 

ural  force  to  take  their  place.  Darwin  has 
provided  or  indicated  this  natural  force,  this 
process  of  nature ;  he  has  opened  the  door"' 
through  which  a  happier  posterity  may  eject 
miracles  forever."  Then  follows  the  sentence' 
just  quoted,  "  He  who  knows  what  hangs  on 
miracle,  will  applaud  Darwin  as  one  of  the 
greatest  benefactors  of  the  human  race."  With 
Strauss  and  others  of  his  class,  miracles  and 
design  are  identical,  because  one  as  well  as 
the  other  assumes  supernatural  agency.  He 
quotes  Helmholtz,  who  says,  "  Darwin's  theory, 
that  adaptation,  in  the  formation  of  organisms 
may  arise  without  the  intervention  of  intelH- 
gence,  by  the  blind  operation  of  natural  law  ; " 
and  then  adds,  "  As  Helmholtz  distinguishes 
the  English  naturalist  as  the  man  who  has  ban- 
ished design  from  nature,  so  we  have  praised 
him  as  the  man  who  has  done  away  with  mir- 
acles. Both  mean  the  same  thin^.^  Design  is 
the  miracle-worker  in  nature,  which  has  put 
the  world  upside  down  ;  or  as  Spinoza  says,  has 
placefl  the  last  first,  the  effect  for  the  cause, 
and  thus  destroyed  the  very  idea   of  nature. 

*  This  short  but  significant  sentence  is  omitted  in  the  excel- 
lent translation  of  Strauss's  book,  by  Mathilde  Blind,  republished 
in  New  York,  by  Henry  Holt  &  Company,  1873. 


148  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

Design  in  nature,  especially  in  the  department 
of  living  organisms,  has  ever  been  appealed  to 
by  those  who  desire  to  prove  that  the  world  is 
not  self-evolved,  but  the  work  of  an  intelligent 
Creator."  (p.  211)  On  page  175,  he  refers  to 
those  who  ridicule  Darwin,  and  yet  are  so  far 
under  the  influence  of  the  spirit  of  the  age  as 
to  deny  miracles  or  the  intervention  of  the  Cre- 
ator in  the  course  of  nature,  and  says  :  "  Very 
well ;  how  do  they  account  for  the  origin  of 
man,  and  in  general  the  development  of  the 
organic  out  of  the  inorganic  ?  Would  they  as- 
sume that  the  original  man  as  such,  no  matter 
how  rough  and  unformed,  but  still  a  man, 
sprang  immediately  out  of  the  inorganic,  out 
of  the  sea  or  the  slime  of  the  Nile  ?  They 
would  hardly  venture  to  say  that ;  then  they 
must  know  that  there  is  only  the  choice  be- 
tween miracle,  the  divine  hand  of  the  Creator, 
and  Darwin."  What  an  alternative ;  the  Cre- 
ator or  Darwin !  In  this,  however,  Strauss  is 
right.  To  banish  design  from  nature,  as  is  done 
by  Darwin's  theory,  is,  in  the  language  (5f  the 
Rev,  Walter  Mitchell,  virtually  "  to  dethrone 
the  Creator." 

Ludwig  Weis,  M.  D.,  of  Darmstadt,  says  it 
is  at  present   "  the  mode  "  in  Germany  (and 


WHA  T   IS  BAR WINISM ?  149 

of  course  in  a  measure  here),  to  glorify  Bud- 
dhism. Strauss,  he  adds,  says,  "  Nature  knows 
itself  in  man,  and  in  that  he  expresses  the 
thought  which  all  Idealism  and  all  Materialism 
make  the  grand  end.  To  the  same  effect  it  is 
said,  '  In  Man  the  All  comprehends  itself  as 
conscious  being  (comes  to  self-consciousness) ; 
or,  in  Man  the  absolute  knowledge  (Wissen, 
the  act  of  knowing)  appears  in  the  limits  of 
personality.'  This  was  the  doctrine  of  the 
Buddhist  and  of  the  ancient  Chinese."  Thus, 
as  Dr.  Weis  says,  "  in  the  nineteenth  centuryjj 
of  the  Christian  era,  philosophers  and  scientists 
have  reached  the  point  where  the  Chinese  werej' 
two  thousand  years  ago." 

The  only  way  that  is  apparent  for  account- 
ing for  evolution  being  rejected  in  1844,  and 
for  its  becoming  a  popular  doctrine  in  1866, 
is,  that  it  happens  to  suit  a  prevailing  state  of 
mind.  It  is  a  fact,  so  far  as  our  limited  knowl- 
edge extends,  that  no  one  is  willing  to  acknowl- 
edge himself,  not  simply  an  evolutionist,  but 
an  evolutionist  of  the  Darwinian  school,  who 
is  not  either  a  Materialist  by  profession,  or  a 
disciple  of  Herbert  Spencer,  or  an  advocate  of 
the  philosophy  of  Hume. 

There  is  another  significant  fact  which  goes 


150  WHAT  IS   DARWINISM? 

to  prove  that  the  denial  of  design,  which  is 
the  "  creative  idea  "  of  Darwinism,  is  the  main 
cause  of  its  popularity  and  success.  Professor 
Owen,  England's  greatest  naturalist,  is  a  deri- 
vationist.  Derivation  and  evolution  are  con- 
vertible terms.  Both  include  the  denial  that 
species  are  j^i'iniordial,  or  have  each  a  dif- 
ferent origin  ;  and  both  imply  that  one  spe- 
cies is  formed  out  of  another  and  simpler  form. 
Professor  Owen,  however,  although  a  deriva- 
tionist,  or  evolutionist,  is  a  very  strenuous  anti- 
Darwinian.     He  differs  from  Darwin  as  to  two 

/  points.  First,  as  to  Natural  Selection,  or  the 
Survival  of  the  Fittest.  He  says  that  is  in- 
consistent with  facts  and  utterly  insufficient  to 
account  for  the  origin  of  species.  He  refers 
the  origin  of  species  to  an  inherent  tendency 
to  change  impressed  on  them  from  the  begin- 

^  ning.  And  second,  he  admits  design.  He 
denies  that  the  succession  and  origin  of  species 
are  due  to  chance,  and  expresses  his  belief 
in  the  constant  operation  of  creative  power  in 
the  formation  of  species  from  the  varied  de- 
scendants of  more  generalized  forms.-^  He 
believes  "  that  all  living  things  have  been  pro- 
duced by  such  law  (of  variation)  in  time,  their 

1  The  Fallacies  of  Darwinism,  by  C.  R.  Brec,  M.  D.,  p.  308. 


v^ 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  151 

position  and  uses  in  the  world  having  been 
preordained  by  the  Creator."  ^  Professor  Owen 
says  he  has  taught  the  doctrine  of  derivation 
(evolution)  for  thirty  years,  but  it  attracted 
little  attention.  As  soon,  however,  as  Darwin 
leaves  out  design,  we  have  a  prairie-fire.  A 
prairie-fire,  happily,  does  not  continue  very 
long ;  and  while  it  lasts,  it  burns  up  little  else 
than  stubble. 

4.  All  the  evidence  we  have  in  favor  of  'i 
/  the  fixedness~or"species' is,  of  course,  evidence 
not  only  against  Darwinism,  but  against  evolu- 
tion in  all  its  fo^'uis.  It  would  seem  idle  to  dis- 
cuss the  question  of  the  mutability  of  species, 
until  satisfied  what  species  is.  This,  unhappily, 
is  a  question  which  it  is  exceedingly  difficult 
to  answer.  Not  only  do  the  definitions  given 
by  scientific  men  differ  almost  indefinitely, 
but  there  is  endless  diversity  in  classification. 
Think  of  four  hundred  and  eighty  species  of 
humming-birds.  Haeckel  says  that  one  natu- 
ralist makes  ten,  another  forty,  another  two 
hundred,  and  another  one,  species  of  a  certain 
fossil ;  and  we  have  just  heard  that  Agassiz  had 
collected  eight  hundred  species  of  the  same 
fossil  animal.     Haeckel  also  says  (p.  246),  that 

^  The  Fallacies  of  Darwinism,  p.  305. 


152  WHAT  IS  DARWINISMf 

there  are  no  two  zoologists  or  any  two  bot- 
anists who  agree  altogether  in  their  classifi- 
cation. Mr.  Darwin  says,  "  No  clear  line  of 
demarcation  has  yet  been  drawn  between  spe- 
cies and  sub-species,  and  varieties."  (p.  61) 
It  is  absolutely  necessary,  therefore,  that  a 
distinction  should  be  made  between  artificial 
and  natural  species.  No  man  asserts  the  im- 
mutability of  all  those  varieties  of  plants  and 
animals,  which  naturalists,  for  the  convenience 
of  classification,  may  call  distinct  species. 
Haeckel,  for  example,  gives  a  list  of  twelve 
species  of  man.  So  any  one  may  make  fifty 
species  of  dogs,  or  of  horses.  This  is  a  mere 
artificial  distinction,  which  amounts  to  noth- 
ing. There  is  far  greater  difierence  between  a 
pouter  and  a  carrier  pigeon,  than  between  a 
Caucasian  and  a  Mongolian.  To  call  the  for- 
mer varieties  of  the  same  species,  and  the 
latter  distinct  species,  is  altogether  arbitrary. 
Nevertheless,  notwithstanding  the  arbitrary 
classifications  of  naturalists,  it  remains  true 
that  there  are  what  Professor  Dana  calls 
"  units  "  of  the  organic  world.  "  When  in- 
dividuals multiply  from  generation  to  genera- 
tion, it  is  but  a  repetition  of  the  primordial 
type-idea,  and  the  true  notion  of  the  species  is 


WHAT  IS   DARWINISM?  153 

not  in  the  resulting  group,  but  in  the  idea  or 
potential  element  which  is  the  basis  of  every 
individual  of  the  group."  ^  Dr.  Morton's  defi- 
nition of  species  as  "primordial  organic  forms," 
agrees  with  that  given  by  Professor  Dana ;  and 
both  agree  with  the  Bible,  which  says  that 
God  created  plants  and  animals  each  after  its 
kind.  A  primordial  form  is  a  form  which  was  | 
not  evolved  out  of  some  other  form,  but  which 
began  to  be  in  the  form  —  subject,  to  such  va- 
rieties as  we  see  in  the  dog,  horse,  and  man  — 
in  which  it  continued  during  the  whole  period 
of  its  existence. 

The  criteria  of  these  primordial  forms  or 
species  of  nature,  are,  (1.)  Morphological. 
Animals,  however,  may  approach  very  nearly 
in  their  structure,  and  yet  belong  to  different 
species.  It  is  only  when  the  peculiarities  of 
structure  are  indicative  of  specialty  of  design, 
that  they  form  a  safe  ground  of  classification. 
If  the  teeth  of  one  animal  are  formed  to  fit  it 
to  feed  on  flesh,  and  those  of  another  to  fit  it  to 
feed  on  plants ;  if  one  has  webbed  feet  and  an- 
other not ;  then,  in  all  such  cases,  difference  of 
structure  proves  difference  of  kind.  (2.)  Phys- 
iological ;  that  is,  the  internal  nature,  indicated 

1  Bibliotheca  Sacra,  1857,  p.  861. 


154  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

by  habits  and  instincts,  furnishes  another  safe 
criterion.  (3.)  Permanent  fecundity.  The 
progenitors  of  the  same  species  reproduce  their 
kind  from  generation  to  generation  ;  the  prog- 
eny of  different  species,  although  nearly  allied, 
do  not.  It  is  a  fixed  law  of  nature  that  species 
never  can  be  annihilated,  except  by  all  the 
individuals  included  in  them  dying  outj  and 
that  new  species  cannot  be  produced.  Every 
true  species  is  primordial.  It  is  this  fact,  that 
is,  that  no  variety,  with  the  essential  charac- 
teristics of  species,  has  ever  been  produced, 
that  forces,  as  we  saw  above.  Professor  Huxley 
to  pronounce  Mr.  Darwin's  doctrine  to  be  an 
unproved  hypothesis.  Species  continue  ;  vari- 
eties, if  let  alone,  always  revert  to  the  normal 
type.  It  requires  the  skill  and  constant  atten- 
tion of  man  to  keep  them  distinct. 

Now  that  there  are  such  forms  in  nature,  is 
proved  not  only  from  the  testimony  of  the 
great  body  of  the  most  distinguished  natural- 
ists, but  by  all  the  facts  in  the  case. 

JFirst,  the  fact  that  such  sjDecies  are  known 
to  have  existed  unchanged,  through  what  ge- 
ologists consider  almost  immeasurable  periods 
of  time.  Palaeontologists  tell  us  that  Trilobites 
abounded  from  the  primordial  age  down  to  the 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  155 

Carboniferous  period,  that  is,  as  they  suppose, 
through  milUons  of  years.  More  wonderful 
still,  the  little  animals  whose  remains  consti- 
tute the  chalk  formations  which  are  spread 
over  large  areas  of  country,  and  are  sometimes 
a  hundred  feet  thick,  are  now  at  work  at  the 
bottom  of  the  Atlantic.  Principal  Dawson 
tells  us,  with  regard  to  Mollusks  existing  in  a 
sub-fossil  state  in  the  Post-pliocene  clays  of 
Canada,  that  "after  carefully  studying  about 
two  hundred  species,  and  of  some  of  these, 
many  hundreds  of  specimens,  I  have  arrived 
at  the  conclusion  that  they  are  absolutely  un- 
changed  Here  again  we  have  an  abso- 
lute refusal,  on  the  part  of  all  these  animals,  to 
admit  that  they  are  derived,  or  have  tended 
to  sport  into  new  species."  ^ 

On  the  previous  page  he  says,  "  Pictet  cata- 
logues ninety-eight  species  of  mammals  which 
inhabited  Europe  in  the  Post-glacial  period. 
Of  these  fifty-seven  still  exist  unchanged,  and 
the  remainder  have  disappeared.  Not  one  can 
be  shown  to  have  been  modified  into  a  new 
form,  though  some  of  them  have  been  obliged, 
'by  changes  of  temperature  and  other  condi- 
tions, to  remove  into  distant  and  now  widely 
separated  regions." 

1  The  Story  of  Earth  and  Man,  p.  358. 


156  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

A  second  fact  which  attests  the  primordial 
character  and  fixedness  of  species  is,  that  every 
species  as  it  first  appears,  is  not  in  a  transition 
state  between  one  form  and  another,  but  in 
the  perfection  of  its  kind.  Science  has  indeed 
discovered  an  ascending  order  in  creation, 
which  agrees  marvellously  with  that  given  in 
the  book  of  Genesis :  first,  vegetable  produc- 
tions ;  then  the  moving  creatures  in  the  sea ; 
then  terrestrial  animals ;  and  finally  man.  Nat- 
uralists, who  utterly  reject  the  Scriptures  as  a 
divine  revelation,  speak  with  the  highest  ad- 
miration of  the  Mosaic  account  of  the  creation, 
as  compared  with  any  other  cosmogony  of  the 
ancient  world.  While  there  is  in  general  an 
ascending  series  in  these  living  forms,  each 
was  perfect  in  its  kind. 

Agassiz  says  that  fishes  existed  contempora- 
neously with  species  of  all  the  invertebrate 
sub-kingdoms  in  the  Taconic,  or  sub-Cambrian 
strata.  This  is  the  extreme  limit  of  known 
geological  strata  in  which  life  is  found  to  have 
existed.  As  the  evolution  of  one  species  out  of 
another  requires,  according  to  Darwin,  millions 
of  years,  it  is  out  of  the  question  to  trace  these 
animals  beyond  the  strata  in  which  their  re- 
mains are  now  found.     Yet  "  crabs  or  lobsters, 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  157 

worms,  cuttle-fish,  snails,  jelly-fish,  star-fish, 
oysters,  the  polyps  lived  contemporaneously 
with  the  first  known  vertebrate  animals  that 
ever  came  into  being  —  all  as  clearly  defined 
by  unmistakable  ordinal  or  special  characters 
asrthey  are  at  the  present  moment."^ 

The  foot  of  the  horse  is  considered  by  zoolo- 
gists as  "  one  of  the  most  beautiful  contrivances 
in  nature."  The  remains  of  this  animal  found 
in  what  is  called  the  Pliocene  Period,  show  the 
foot  to  have  been  as  perfect  then  as  it  is  now. 

Mr.  Wallace  says  that  man  has  existed  on 
the  earth  a  hundred  thousand  years,  and  that 
it  is  probable  that  he  existed  four  hundred 
thousand  years  ago.  Of  course  we  do  not  be- 
lieve this.  We  have  little  faith  in  the  chronol- 
ogy of  science.  It  gives  no  sure  data  for  the 
calculation  of  time,  hence  we  find  them  differ- 
ing from  four  thousand  to  four  hundred  thou- 
sand years  as  to  the  time  required  for  certain 
formations.     The  most  trustworthy  geologists 

1  Dr.  Bree,  p.  275.  We  presume  geologists  differ  in  the  terms 
which  they  use  to  designate  strata.  Agassiz  calls  the  oldest 
containing  fossil,  the  sub-Cambrian.  Principal  Dawson  calls  the 
oldest  the  Laurentian,  and  places  the  first  vertebrates  in  the 
Silurian.  This  is  of  no  moment  as  to  the  argument.  The  im- 
portant fact  is  that  each  species  is  distinct  as  soon  as  it  appears  ; 
and  that  many  have  remained  to  the  present  time. 


158  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

teach  that  all  that  is  known  of  the  antiquity 
of  man  falls  within  the  limits  of  Biblical  chro- 
nology. The  further,  however,  Darwinians 
push  back  the  origin  of  man,  the  stronger,  as 
against  them,  becomes  the  argument  for  the 
immutability  of  species.  The  earliest  remains 
of  man  show  that  at  his  first  appearance,  he 
was  in  perfection.  The  oldest  known  human 
skull  is  that  called  the  "  Engis,"  because  found 
in  the  cave  of  Engis  in  Belgium.  Of  this  skull 
Professor  Huxley  says  it  may  have  belonged 
to  an  individual  of  one  of  the  existing  races  of 
men.  Principal  Dawson,  who  has  a  cast  of  it, 
on  the  same  shelf  with  the  skulls  of  some  Al- 
gonquin Indians,  says  it  might  be  taken  for 
the  skull  of  an  American  Indian.  Indeed,  Daw- 
son seems  to  think  that  these  fossil  human  re- 
mains go  to  show  that  the  earliest  men  were 
better  developed  than  any  of  the  extant  races. 

Thirdly.  The  historical  evidence  accessible 
all  goes  to  prove  the  immutability  of  species. 
The  earliest  historical  records  and  the  oldest 
monuments  prove  that  all  extant  animals  were 
what  the}^  now  are  thousands  of  years  ago. 

Fourthly.  The  fact  that  hybrids  cannot  be 
perpetuated,  that  no  device  of  man  can  pro- 
duce a  new  species,  is  proof  that  God  has  fixed 
""^  '  — ■■-'  1 ,,111 1, _ , , 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  159 

limits  which  cannot  be  passed.  This  Huxley 
himself  admits  to  be  an  insuperable  objection. 
So  long  as  it  exists,  he  says,  Darwin's  doctrine 
must  be  content  to  remain  a  hypothesis  ;  it 
cannot  pretend  to  the  dignity  of  a  theory. 
Another  fact  of  like  import  is  that  varieties 
artificially  produced,  if  let  alone,  uniformly 
revert  to  the  simple  typical  form.  It  is  only 
by  the  utmost  care  they  can  be  kept  distinct. 
All  the  highly  prized  varieties  of  horses,  cattle, 
sheep,  pigeons,  etc.,  without  human  control, 
would  be  merged  each  class  into  one,  with  only 
the  slight  differences  occasioned  by  diversities 
of  climate  and  other  external  conditions.  If  in 
the  sight  of  man  it  is  important  that  the  words 
of  a  book  should  be  kept  distinct,  it  is  equally 
evident  that  in  the  sight  of  God  it  is  no  less 
important  that  the  "  units  of  nature "  should 
not  be  mixed  in  inextricable  and  indistinguish- 
able confusion. 

Fifthly.  The  sudden  appearance  of  new  kinds 
of  animals  is  another  fact  which  Palaeontologists 
urge  against  the  doctrine  of  evolution.  Ac- 
cording to  the  view  of  geologists  great  changes 
have,  at  remote  periods,  occurred  in  the  state 
of  the  earth.  Continents  have  been  sub- 
merged and  the  bottom  of  the  sea  raised  above 


160  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

the  surface  of  the  waters.  Corresponding 
changes  have  occurred  in  the  state  of  the  at- 
mosphere surrounding  the  globe,  and  in  the 
temperature  of  the  earth.  Accompanying  or 
following  these  revolutions  new  classes  of  plants 
and  animals  appear,  adapted  to  the  new  condi- 
tion of  the  earth's  surface.  Whence  do  they 
come  ?  They  have,  as  Dawson  expresses  it, 
neither  fathers  nor  mothers.  Nothing  pre- 
cedes them  from  which  they  could  be  derived ; 
and  nothing  of  the  same  kind  follows  them. 
They  live  through  their  appointed  period ;  and 
then,  in  a  multitude  of  cases,  finally  disappear, 
and  are  in  their  turn  followed  by  new  orders 
or  kinds.  In  other  words,  the  links  or  con- 
necting forms  of  this  assumed  regular  succes- 
sion or  derivation  are  not  to  be  found.  This 
fact  is  so  patent,  that  Hugh  Miller,  when  argu- 
ing against  the  doctrine  of  evolution  as  pro- 
posed in  the  "  Vestiges  of  Creation,"  says,  that 
the  record  in  the  rocks  seems  to  have  been 
written  for  the  very  purpose  of  proving  that 
such  evolution  is  impossible. 

We  have  the  explicit  testimony  of  Agassiz, 
/;  as  a  Palaeontologist,  that  the  facts  of  geology 
||  contradict  the  theory  of  the  transmutation,  of 
'.  species.     This  testimony  has  been  repeatedly 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  161 

given  and  in  various  forms.  In  the  last  pro- 
duction of  his  pen,  he  says :  "  As  a  Palaeontol- 
ogist I  have  from  the  beginning  stood  aloof 
from  this  new  theory  of  transmutation,  now 
so  widely  admitted  by  the  scientific  world.  Its 
doctrines,  in  fact,  contradict  what  the  animal 
forms  buried  in  the  rocky  strata  of  our  earth 
tell  us  of  their  own  introduction  and  succession 
upon  the  surface  of  the  globe."  "  Let  us  look 
now  at  the  earliest  vertebrates,  as  known  and 
recorded  in  geological  surveys.  They  should, 
of  course,  if  there  is  any  truth  in  the  transmu- 
tation theory,  correspond  with  the  lowest  in 
rank  or  standing.  What  then  are  the  ear- 
liest known  vertebrates  ?  They  are  Selachians 
(sharks  and  their  allies)  and  Ganoids  (garpikes 
and  the  like),  the  highest  of  all  living  fishes, 
structurally  speaking."  He  closes  the  article 
from  which  these  quotations  are  taken  wdth  the 
assertion,  "  that  there  is  no  evidence  of  a  di- 
rect descent  of  later  from  earlier  species  in  the 
geological  succession  of  animals."  ^  It  will  be 
observed  that  Agassiz  is  quoted,  not  as  to  mat- 
ters of  theory,  but  as  to  matters  of  fact.  The 
only  answer  which  evolutionists  can  make  to 
this,  argument,  is  the  imperfection  of  the  geo- 

*  Atlantic  Monthly,  January,  187-i. 
11 


162  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

logical  record.  When  asked,  Where  are  the 
immediate  predecessors  of  these  new  species  ? 
they  answer,  They  have  disappeared,  or,  have 
not  yet  been  found.  When  asked,  Where  are 
their  immediate  successors  ?  the  answer  again 
is.  They  have  disappeared.^  This  is  an  objec- 
tion which  Mr.  Darwin,  with  his  usual  candor, 
virtually  admits  to  be  unanswerable.  We  have 
already  seen,  that  he  says,  "  Every  one  will 
admit  that  the  geological  record  is  imperfect ; 
but  very  few  can  believe  that  it  is  so  very  im- 
perfect as  my  theory  demands." 

Such  are  some  of  the  grounds  on  which 
geologists  and  palaeontologists  of  the  highest 
rank  assert  that  the  theory  of  evolution  has 
not  the  slightest  scientific  basis ;  and  they  sup- 
port their  assertion  with  an  amount  of  evi- 
dence of  which  the  above  items  are  a  misera- 
ble pittance. 

Sixthly.  There  is  another   consideration   of 

1  We  liave  heard  a  story  of  a  gentleman  wlio  gave  an  artist  a 
commission  for  a  historical  painting,  and  suggested  as  the  sub- 
ject, the  Passage  of  the  Israelites  over  the  Red  Sea.  In  due  time 
he  was  informed  that  his  picture  was  finished,  and  was  shown 
by  the  artist  a  large  canvas  painted  red.  "  What  is  that  ?  "  he 
asked.  "Why,"  says  the  artist,  "that  is  the  Red  Sea."  "But 
where  are  the  Israelites  ?  "  "  Oh,  they  have  passed  over."  And 
where  are  the  Egyptians?  "     "  They  are  under  the  sea." 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  163 

decisive  importance.  Strauss  says,  there  are 
three  things  wliich  have  been  stumbKng-blocks 
in  the  way  of  science.  First,  the  origin  of  life  ;  A 
second,  the  origin  of  consciousness;  third,  the 
origin  of  reason.  These  are  equivalent  to  the 
gaps  which,  Principal  Dawson  says,  exist  in  the 
theory  of  evolution.     He    states   them    thus : 

1.  That    between    dead    and    living    matter. 

2.  That  between  vegetable  and  animal  life. 
"  These  are  necessarily  the  converse  of  each 
other :  the  one  deoxidizes  and  accumulates, 
the  other  oxidizes  and  expends."  3.  That 
"  between  any  species  of  plant  or  animal,  and 
any  other  species.  It  was  this  gap,  and  this 
only,  which  Darwin  undertook  to  fill  up  by 
his  great  work  on  the  origin  of  species,  but, 
notwithstanding  the  immense  amount  of  mate- 
rial thus  expended,  it  yawns  as  wide  as  ever, 
since  it  must  be  admitted  that  no  case  has  been 
ascertained  in  which  an  individual  of  one  spe- 
cies has  transgressed  the  limits  between  it  and 
another  species."  4.  "  Another  gap  is  between 
the  nature  of  the  animal  and  the  self-conscious, 
reasoning,  and  moral  nature  of  man."  (pp.  325- 
328) 

First,  as  to  the  gap  between  death  and  life ; 
this  is  what  Dr.  Stirling  calls  the  "  gulf  of  all 


1 64  WHA  T  IS  DAE  WINISM  ? 

gulfs,  which  Mr.  Huxley's  protoplasm  is  as 
powerless  to  efface  as  any  other  material  ex- 
pedient that  has  ever  been  suggested."  ^  This 
gulf  Mr.  Darwin  does  not  attempt  to  bridge 
over.  He  adniits  that  life  owes  its  origin  to 
the  act  of  the  Creator.  This,  however,  the 
most  prominent  of  the  advocates  of  Darwinism 
say,  is  giving  up  the  whole  controversy.  If 
you  admit  the  intervention  of  creative  power 
at  one  point,  you  may  as  well  admit  it  in  any 
other.  If  life  owes  its  origin  to  creative 
power,  why  not  species  ?  If  the  stupendous 
miracle  of  creation  be  admitted,  there  is  no 
show  of  reason  for  denying  supernatural  inter- 
vention in  the  operations  of  nature.  Most 
Darwinians  attempt  to*  pass  this  gulf  on  the 
imaginary  bridge  of  spontaneous  generation. 
In  other  words,  they  say  there  is  no  gulf 
there.  The  molecules  of  matter,  in  one  com- 
bination, may  as  well  exhibit  the  phenomena 
of  life,  as  in  other  combinations,  any  other 
kind  of  phenomena.  The  distinguished  Sir 
William  Thomson  cannot  trust  himself  to  that  / 

^  As  Regards  Protoplasm  in  Relation  to  Professor  Huxley^ s 
Essay  on  the  Physical  Basis  of  Life.  By  Dr.  James  H.  Stirling. 
See,  also,  Physiological  Anatomy  and  Physiology  of  Man,  by  L. 
S.  Beale ;  also,  The  Mystery  of  Life  in  Reply  to  Dr.  GulVs  Attack 
on  the  Theory  of  Vitality.     By  L.  S.  Beale,  M.  D.,  1871. 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  165 

bridge.  "  Dead  matter,"  he  says,  "  cannot 
become  living  matter  without  coming  under 
the  influence  of  matter  previously  alive.  This 
seems  to  me  as  sure  a  teaching  of  science  as 

the  law  of  gravitation I  am  ready  to 

adopt,  as  an  article  of  scientific  faith,  true 
through  all  space  and  through  all  time,  that 
life  proceeds  from  life,  and  nothing  but  life."  ^ 
He  refers  the  origin  of  life  on  this  earth  to 
falling  meteors,  which  bring  with  them  from 
other  planets  the  germs  of  living  organisms ; 
and  from  those  germs  all  the  plants  and  ani- 
mals with  which  our  world  is  now  covered 
have  been  derived.  Principal  Dawson  thinks 
that  this  was  intended  as  irony.  But  the 
whole  tone  of  the  address,  and  specially  of  the 
closing  portion  of  it,  in  which  this  idea  is  ad- 
vanced, is  far  too  serious  to  admit  of  such  an 
explanation. 

No  one  can  read  the  address  referred  to  with- 
out being  impressed,  and  even  awed,  by  the 
immensity  and  grandeur  of  the  field  of  knowl- 
edge which  falls  legitimately  within  the  domain 
of  science.  The  perusal  of  that  discourse  pro- 
duces a  feeling  of  humility  analogous  to  the 

^  The  address  delivered  by  Sir  William  Thomson,  as  Presi- 
dent of  the  British  Association  at  its  meeting  in  Edinburgh,  1871. 


166  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM1 

sense  of  insignificance  which  every  man  expe- 
riences when  he  thinks  of  himself  as  a  speck 
on  the  surface  of  the  earth,  which  itself  is  but 
a  speck  in  the  immensity  of  the  universe. 
And  when  a  man  of  mere  ordinary  culture 
sees  Sir  William  Thomson  surveying  that  field 
with  a  mastery  of  its  details  and  familiarity 
with  all  the  recondite  methods  of  its  investi- 
gation, he  feels  as  nothing  in  his  presence. 
Yet  this  great  man,  whom  we  cannot  help 
regarding  with  wonder,  is  so  carried  away  by 
the  spirit  of  his  class  as  to  say,  "  Science  is 
bound,  by  the  everlasting  law  of  honor,  to  face 
fearlessly  every  problem  which  can  fairly  be 
brought  before  it.  If  a  probable  solution,  con- 
sistent with  the  ordinary  course  of  nature,  can 
be  found,  we  must  not  invoke  an  abnormal  act 
of  Creative  Power."  And,  therefore,  instead 
of  invoking  Creative  Power,  he  accounts  for 
the  origin  of  life  on  earth  by  falling  meteors. 
How  he  accounts  for  its  origin  in  the  places 
whence  the  meteors  came,  he  does  not  say. 
Yet  Sir  William  Thomson  believes  in  Creative 
Power;  and  in  a  subsequent  page,  we  shall 
quote  his  explicit  repudiation  of  the  atheistic 
element  in  the  Darwinian  theory. 

Strauss   quotes   Dubois-Reymond,    a   distin- 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM f  167 

guished  naturalist,  as  teaching  that  the  first  of 
these  great  problems,  viz.  the  origin  of  life,  ad- 
mits of  explanation  on  scientific  {i.  e.,  in  his 
sense,  materialistic)  principles  ;  and  even  the 
third,  viz.  the  origin  of  reason  ;  but  the  second, 
or  the  origin  of  consciousness,  he  says,  "  is 
perfectly  inscrutable."  Dubois-Reymond  holds 
that  "  the  most  accurate  knowledge  of  the  es- 
sential organism  reveals  to  us  only  matter  in 
motion  ;  but  between  this  material  movement 
and  my  feeling  pain  or  pleasure,  experiencing 
a  sweet  taste,  seeing  red,  with  the  conclusion 
'  therefore  I  exist,'  there  is  a  profound  gulf; 
and  it  '  remains  utterly  and  forever  inconceiva- 
ble why  to  a  number  of  atoms  of  carbon,  hy- 
drogen, etc.,  it  should  not  be  a  matter  of  in- 
difierence  how  they  lie  or  how  they  move  ;  nor 
can  we  in  any  wise  tell  how  consciousness 
should  result  from  their  concurrent  action.' 
Whether,"  adds  Strauss,  "  these  Verba  3Iag- 
istri  are  indeed  the  last  word  on  the  subject, 
time  only  can  tell."  ^  But  if  it  is  inconceivable, 
not  to  say  absurd,  that  sense  -  consciousness 
should  consist  in  the  motion  of  molecules  of 
matter,  or  be  a  function  of  such  molecules,  it 
can    hardly  be    less    absurd   to  account    for 

*  7%€  Old  Faith  and  the  New.     Prefatory  Postscript,  xxi. 


168  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

thought,  conscience,  and  religious  feeling  and 
belief  on  any  such  hypothesis.  It  may  be  said 
that  Mr.  Darwin  is  not  responsible  for  these 
extreme  opinions.  That  is  very  true.  Mr. 
Darwin  is  not  a  Monist,  for  in  admitting  crea- 
tion, he  admits  a  dualism  as  between  God  and 
the  world.  Neither  is  he  a  Materialist,  inas- 
much as  he  assumes  a  supernatural  origin  for 
the  infinitesimal  modicum  of  life  and  intelli- 
gence in  the  primordial  animalcule,  from  which 
without  divine  purpose  or  agency,  all  living 
things  in  the  whole  history  of  our  earth  have 
descended.  All  the  innumerable  varieties  of 
plants,  all  the  countless  forms  of  animals,  with 
all  their  instincts  and  faculties,  all  the  varie- 
ties of  men  with  their  intellectual  endowments, 
and  their  moral  and  religious  nature,  have, 
according  to  Darwin,  been  evolved  by  the 
agency  of  the  blind,  unconscious  laws  of  nat- 
ure. This  infinitesimal  spark  of  supernatu- 
ralism  in  Mr.  Darwin's  theory,  would  inevitably 
have  gone  out  of  itself,  had  it  not  been  rudely 
and  contemptuously  trodden  out  by  his  bolder, 
t  and  more  logical  successors. 
f  The  grand  and  fatal  objection  to  Darwinism 
I  is  this  exclusion  of  design  in  the  origin  of  spe- 
I  cies,  or  the   production   of  living   organisms 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  169 

By  design  is  meant  the  intelligent  and  volun- 
tary selection  of  an  end,  and  the  intelligent 
and  voluntary  choice,  application,  and  control 
of  means  appropriate  to  the  accomplishment  of 
that  end.  That  design,  therefore,  implies  in- 
telligence, is  involved  in  its  Very  nature.  No^ 
man  can  perceive  this  adaptation  of  means  to 
the  accomplishment  of  a  preconceived  end, 
without  experiencing  an  irresistible  conviction 
that  it  is  the  work  of  mind.  No  man  does 
doubt  it,  and  no  man  can  doubt  it.  Darwin 
does  not  deny  it.  Haeckel  does  not  deny  it. 
No  Darwinian  denies  it.  What  they  do  is  to 
deny  that  there  is  any  design  in  nature.  It  is 
merely  apparent,  as  when  the  wind  of  the 
Bay  of  Biscay,  as  Huxley  says,  "  selects  the 
right  kind  of  sand  and  spreads  it  in  heaps  upon 
the  plains."  But  in  thus  denying  design  in 
nature,  these  writers  array  against  themselye.s 
the  intuitive  perceptions  and  irresistible  convic- 
tions of  all  mankind,  ^-  a  barrier  which  no  man 
has  ever  been  able  to  surmount.  Sir  William 
Thomson,  in  the  address  already  referred  to, 
says :  "  I  feel  profoundly  convinced  that  the 
argument  of  design  has  been  greatly  too  much 
lost  sight  of  in  recent  zoological  speculations. 
Reaction   against  the  frivolities   of  teleology, 


170  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM ? 

such  as  are  to  be  found,  not  rarely,  in  the  notes 
of  the  learned  commentators  on  '  Paley's  Nat- 
ural Theology,'  has,  I  believe,  had  a  temporary 
effect  of  turning  attention  from  the  solid  irre- 
fragable argument  so  well  put  forward  in  that 
excellent  old  book.  But  overpowering  proof 
of  intelligence  and  benevolent  design  lie  all 
around  us,  and  if  ever  perplexities,  whether 
metaphysical  or  scientific,  turn  us  away  from 
them  for  a  time,  they  come  back  upon  us  with 
irresistible  force,  showing  to  us  through  nature 
the  influence  of  a  free  will,  and  teaching  us 
that  all  living  beings  depend  upon  one  ever- 
acting  Creator  and  Ruler." 

It  is  impossible  for  even  Mr.  Darwin,  incon- 
sistent as  it  is  with  his  whole  theory,  to  deny 
all  design  in  the  constituti(^i  of  nature.  What 
is  his  law  of  heredity?  Why  should  like  be- 
get like  ?  Take  two  germ  cells,  one  of  a  plant, 
another  of  an  animal ;  no  man  by  microscope 
or  by  chemical  analysis,  or  by  the  magic  power 
of  the  spectroscope,  can  detect  the  slightest 
difference  between  them,  yet  the  one  infallibly 
develops  into  a  plant  and  the  other  into  an 
animal.  Take  the  germ  of  a  fish  and  of  a  bird, 
and  they  are  equally  indistinguishable ;  yet 
the  one  always  under  all  conditions  develops 


WHA  T  IS  DA  R  WINISM  ?  171 

into  a  fish  and  the  other  into  a  bird.  Why  is 
this  ?  There  is  no  physical  force,  whether 
light,  heat,  electricity,  or  anything  else,  which 
makes  the  slightest  approximation  to  account- 
ing for  that  fact.  To  say,  as  Stuart  Mill  would 
say,  that  it  is  an  ultimate  fact,  and  needs  no  ex- 
planation, is  to  say  that  there  may  be  an  effect 
without  an  adequate  cause.  The  venerable  R. 
E.  Yon  Baer,  the  first  naturalist  in  Russia,  of 
whom  Agassiz  speaks  in  terms  of  such  affection- 
ate veneration  in  the  "  Atlantic  Monthly  "  for 
January,  1874,  has  written  a  volume  dated 
Dorpat,  1873,  and  entitled  "Zum  Streit  liber 
den  Darwinismus."  In  that  volume,  as  we 
learn  from  a  German  periodical,  the  author 
says :  "  The  Darwinians  lay  great  stress  on 
heredity  ;  but  what  is  the  law  of  heredity  but 
a  determination  of  something  future  ?  Is  it  not 
in  its  nature  in  the  highest  degree  Ideologi- 
cal ?  Indeed,  is  not  the  whole  faculty  of  re- 
production intended  to  introduce  a  new  life- 
process?  When  a  man  looks  at  a  dissected 
insect  and  examines  its  strings  of  eggs,  and 
asks,  Whence  are  they  ?  the  naturalist  of  our 
day  has  no  answer  to  give,  but  that  they  were 
of  necessity  gradually  produced  by  the  changes 
in  matter.     When  it  is  further  asked,  Why  are 


172  WHA  T  IS  DA  R  WIN  ISM  f 

they  there  ?  is  it  wrong  to  say,  It  is  in  order 
that  when  the  eggs  are  mature  and  fertihzecl, 
new  individuals  of  the  same  form  should  be 
produced." 

It  is  further  to  be  considered  that  there  are 
innumerable  cases  of  contrivance,  or  evidence 
of  design  in  nature,  to  which  the  principle  of 
natural  selection,  or  the  purposeless  changes 
effected  by  unconscious  force,  cannot  apply ;  as 
for  example,  the  distinction  of  sex,  with  all 
that  is  therein  involved.  But  passing  by  such 
cases,  it  may  be  asked,  what  would  it  avail  to 
get  rid  of  design  in  the  vegetable  and  animal 
kingdom,  while  the  whole  universe  is  full  of 
it  ?  That  this  ordered  Cosmos  is  not  from  ne- 
cessity or  chance,  is  almost  a  self-evident  fact. 
Not  one  man  in  a  million  of  those  who  ever 
heard  of  God,  either  does  doubt  or  can  doubt 
it.  Besides  how  are  the  cosmical  relations  of 
light,  heat,  electricity,  to  the  constituent  parts 
of  the  universe,  and  especiall}^,  so  far  as  this 
earth  is  concerned,  to  vegetable  and  animal 
life,  to  be  accounted  for  ?  Is  this  all  chance 
work  ?  Is  it  by  chance  that  light  and  heat 
cause  plants  to  carry  on  their  wonderful  oper- 
ations, transmuting  the  inorganic  into  the  or- 
ganic, dead  matter  into  living  and  life  sustain- 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  173 

ing  matter  ?  Is  it  without  a  purpose  that  water 
instead  of  contracting,  expands  at  the  freezing 
point  ?  —  a  fact  to  which  is  due  that  the 
earth  north  of  the  tropic  is  habitable  for  man 
or  beast.  It  is  no  answer  to  this  question  to 
say  that  a  few  other  substances  have  the  same 
pecuharity,  when  no  good  end,  that  we  can  see, 
is  thereby  accomplished.  No  man  is  so  foolish 
as  to  deny  that  his  eye  was  intended  to  enable 
him  to  see,  because  he  cannot  tell  what  the 
spleen  was  made  for.  It  is,  however,  useless 
to  dwell  upon  this  subject.  If  a  man  denies 
that  there  is  design  in  nature,  he  can  with 
quite  as  good  reason  deny  that  there  is  any 
design  in  any  or  in  all  the  works  ever  executed 
by  man. 

The  conclusion  of  the  whole  matter  is,  that 
the  denial  oi'  design  in  nature  is  virtually  the 
denial  of  God.  Mr.  Darwin's  theory  does  deny 
all  design  in  nature,  therefore,  his  theory  is  \ 
virtually  atheistical ;  his  theory,  not  he  him- 
self He  believes  in  a  Creator.  But  when 
that  Creator,  millions  on  millions  of  ages  ago, 
did  something,  —  called  matter  and  a  living 
germ  into  existence,  —  and  then  abandoned  the 
universe  to  itself  to  be  controlled  by  chance 
and    necessity,    without   any   purpose    on   his 


17.4  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

part  as  to  the  result,  or  any  intervention  or 
guidance,  then  He  is  virtually  consigned,  so  far 
as  we  are  concerned,  to  non-existence.  It  has 
already  been  said  that  the  most  extreme  of 
Mr.  Darwin's  admirers  adopt  and  laud  his 
theory,  for  the  special  reason  that  it  banishes 
God  from  the  world ;  that  it  enables  them  to 
account  for  design  without  referring  it  to  the 
purpose  or  agency  of  God.  This  is  done 
expressly  by  Biichner,  Haeckel,  Vogt,  and 
Strauss.  The  opponents  of  Darwinism  direct 
their  objections  principally  against  this  ele- 
ment of  the  doctrine.  This,  as  was  stated  by 
Rev.  Dr.  Peabody,  was  the  main  ground  of  the 
earnest  opposition  of  Agassiz  to  the  theory. 
America's  great  botanist.  Dr.  Asa  Gray,  avows 
himself  an  evolutionist ;  but  he  is  not  a  Dar- 
winian. Of  that  point  we  have  the  clearest 
possible  proof.  Mr.  Darwin,  after  explicitly 
denying  that  the  variations  which  have  re- 
sulted in  "  the  formation  of  the  most  perfectly 
adapted  animals  in  the  world,  man  included, 
were  intentionally  and  specially  guided,"  adds  : 
"  However  much  we  may  wish  it,  we  can 
hardly  follow  Professor  Asa  Gray  in  his  belief 
*that  variation  has  been  led  along  certain 
beneficial  lines '  like  a  stream  '  along  definite 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  175 

and  useful  lines  of  irrigation.'  "  ^  If  Mr.  Dar- 
win does  not  agree  with  Dr.  Gray,  Dr.  Gray 
does  not  ao;ree  with  Mr.  Darwin.  It  is  as  to 
the  exclusion  of  design  from  the  operations  of 
nature  that  our  American,  differs  from  the  Eng- 
lish, naturalist.  This  is  the  vital  point.  The  N 
denial  of  final  causes  is  the  formative  idea  of 
Darwin's  theory,  and  therefore  no  teleologist 
can  be  a  Darwinian.  ^ 

Dr.  Gray  quotes  from  another  writer  the  sen- 
tence, "  It  is  a  singular  fact,  that  when  we  can 
find  how  anything  is  done,  our  first  conclusion 
seems  to  be  that  God  did  not  do  it; "  and  then 
adds,  "  I  agree  with  the  writer  that  this  first 
conclusion  is  premature  and  unworthy ;  I 
will  add,  deplorable.  Through  what  faults  of 
dogmatism  on  the  one  hand,  and  skepticism  on 
the  other,  it  came  to  be  so  thought,  we  need 
not  here  consider.  Let  us  hope,  and  I  confi- 
dently expect,  that  it  is  not  to  last ;  that  the 
relio-ious  faith  which  survived  without  a  shock 
the  notion  of  the  fixedness  of  the  earth  itself, 
may  equally  outlast  the  notion  of  the  absolute 
fixedness  of  the  species  which  inhabit  it ;  that 
in  the  future,  even  more  than  in  the  past,  faith 

1  Variation  of  Plants  and  Animals  under  Domestication.  New 
York,  1868,  vol.  ii.  pp.  515,  516. 


176  WHA  T  IS  DA  R  WIN  ISM  f 

in  an  order,  which  is  the  basis  of  science,  will 
not  —  as  it  cannot  reasonably  —  be  dissevered 
from  faith  in  an  Ordainer,  which  is  the  basis  of 
religion."  ^  We  thank  God  for  that  sentence. 
It  is  the  concluding  sentence  of  Dr.  Gray's 
address  as  ex-President  of  "  The  American 
Association  for  the  Advancement  of  Science," 
delivered  August,  1872. 

Dr.  Gray  goes  further.  He  says,  "  The 
proposition  that  the  things  and  events  in  nat- 
ure were  not  designed  to  be  so,  if  logically  car- 
ried out,  is  doubtless  tantamount  to  atheism." 
Again,  "  To  us,  a  fortuitous  Cosmos  is  simply 
inconceivable.     The  alternative   is  a  designed 

Cosmos If  Mr.  Darwin  believes  that  the 

events  which  he  supposes  to  have  occurred 
and  the  results  we  behold  around  us  were  un- 
directed and  undesigned ;  or  if  the  physicist 
believes  that  the  natural  forces  to  which  he 
refers  phenomena  are  uncaused  and  undi- 
rected, no  argument  is  needed  to  show  that 
such  belief  is  atheistic."  " 
'   We  have  thus  arrived  at  the  answer  to  our 

'  Proceedings  of  the  American  Association  for  the  Advancement 
of  Science.     Cambridge,  1873,  p.  20. 

2  The  Atlantic  Monthly  for  October,  1860.  The  three  articles 
in  the  July,  August,  and  October  numbers  of  the  Atlantic,  on 
this  subject,  have  been  reprinted  with  the  name  of  Dr.  Asa 
Gray  as  their  author. 


WHAT  IS  DARWINISM?  177 

question,  What  is  Darwinism  ?  It  is  Atheism. 
This  does  not  mean,  as  before  said,  that  Mr. 
Darwin  himself  and  all  who  adopt  his  views 
are  atheists;  but  it  means  that  his  theory  is 
atheistic;  that  the  exclusion  of  design  from 
nature  is,  as  Dr.  Gray  says,  tantamount  to 
atheism. 

Among  the  last  words  of  Strauss  were  these  : 
"  We  demand  for  our  universe  the  same  piety 
which  the  devout  man  of  old  demanded  for  his 
God."  "  In  the  enormous  machine  of  the  uni- 
verse, amid  the  incessant  whirl  and  hiss  of  its 
jagged  iron  wheels,  amid  the  deafening  crash 
of  its  ponderous  stamps  and  hammers,  in  the 
midst  of  this  whole  terrific  commotion,  man,  a 
helpless  and  defenceless  creature,  finds  himself 
placed,  not  secure  for  a  moment  that  on  an 
unprudent  motion  a  wheel  may  not  seize  and 
rend  him,  or  a  hammer  crush  him  to  a  powder. 
This  sense  of  abandonment  is  at  first  some- 
thing awful."  ^ 

1  Strauss  says  that  as  he  has  arrived  at  the  conclusion  that 
there  is  no  personal  God,  and  no  life  after  death,  it  would  seem 
to  follow  that  the  question,  Have  we  still  a  religion  ?  "  must  be 
answered  in  the  negative."  But  as  he  makes  the  essence  of 
religion  to  consist  in  a  sense  of  dependence,  and  as  he  felt  him- 
self to  be  helpless  in  the  midst  of  this  whirling  universe,  he  had 
that  much  religion  left. 
12 


178  WHAT  IS  DARWINISM? 

Among  the  last  words  of  Paul  were  these : 
"  I  know  whom  I  have  believed,  and  am  per- 
suaded- that  He  is  able  to  keep  that  which  I 
have  committed  unto  Him  against  that  day. 
....  The  time  of  my  departure  is  at  hand.  I 
have  fought  a  good  fight,  I  have  finished  my 
course,  I  have  kept  the  faith :  henceforth  there 
is  laid  up  for  me  a  crown  of  righteousness, 
which  the  Lord,  the  righteous  judge,  shall  give 
me  at  that  day  :  and  not  to  me  only,  but  unto 
all  them  also  that  love  his  appearing." 


The  Great  Theological  Work  of  the  Age. 

DR.  HODGESJHEOLOGY. 
HgstFraatir  ^^Fologg. 

By  CHARLES  HODGE,  D.D.,  LL.D., 

of  Princeton  Theological   Seminary. 

Complete  in  three  volumes  Svo,  tinted  paper.       Price,  vols.  I.  and  II.,  $4.50. 
Vol.  III.,  $5- 


In  these  volumes  are  comprised  the  results  of  the  life-long  labors  and  investigations  o- 
one  of  the  most  eminent  theologians  of  the  age.  The  work  covers  the  ground  usually  o< 
upied  by  treatises  on  Systematic  Theology,  and  adopts  the  commonly  received  divisions  o 
lie  subject,— THEOLOGY,  Vol.  I.;  ANTHROPOLOGY,  Vol.  H.  ;  SOTERIOLOG^ 
UND  ESCHATOLOGY,  Vol.  IH. 

The  INTRODUCTION  is  devoted  to  the  consideration  of  preliminary  matters,  such  »• 
Method,  or  the  principles  which  sho'.ilj  guide  the  student  of  Theology,  and  the  difFere  .^ 
ftieories  as  to  the  source  and  standard  of  our  knowledge  of  divine  things,  Rationalisi-. 
Mysticism,  the  Roman  Catholic  doctrine  of  the  Rule  of  Faith,  and  the  Protestant  doctri-, 
en  that  subject. 

The  department  of  THEOLOGY  proper  includes  the  origin  of  the  Idea  of  God,  tK 
Being  of  God,  the  Anti-Theistic  systems  of  Atheism,  Polytheism,  Materialism,  anf 
Pantheism  ;  the  Nature  of  God,  the  Divine  Attributes,  the  Doctrines  of  the  Trinity,  t>. 
Divinity  of  Christ,  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit ;  the  Decrees  of  God,  Creation,  Providence,  ai. 
Mwacles. 

rhe  department  of  ANTHROPOLOGY  includes  the  Nature,  Origin,  and  Antiquity  r 
Man,  his  Primitive  State  and  Probation  ;  the  Fall ;  the  Effect  of  Adam's  Sin  upon  himse 
and  upon  his  Posterity  ;  the  Nature  of  Sin  ;  the  Different   Philosophical  and  Theologic 
Theories  on  that  subject. 

SOTERIOLOGY  includes  the  Plan  or  Purpose  of  God  m  reference  to  the  Salvation  o 
Men  ;  the  Person  and  \Vork  of  the  Redeemer ;  his  Offices  as  Prophet,  Priest,  and  Kinj 
the  Work  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in  applying  the  redemption  purchased  by  Christ;  CommC' 
and  Efficacious  Grace,  Regeneration,  Faith,  Justification,  Sanctification,  the  Law  or  Rui 
of  Life,  and  the  means  of  Grace. 

ESCHATOLOGY  includes  the  State  of  the  Soul  after  Death  ;  the  Second  Coming  i. 
Christ ;  the  Resurrection  of  the  Body  ;  the  General  Judgment  and  End  of  the  World,  au 
the  Doctrine  concerning  Heaven  and  Hell. 

The  plan  of  the  author  is  to  state  and  vindicate  the  teachings  of  the  Bible  on  the> 
various  subjects,  and  to  examine  the  antagonistic  doctrines  of  different  classes  of  Theoic 
gians.     His  book,  therefore,  is  intended  to  be  both  didactic  and  elenchtic. 

The  various  topics  are  discussed  with  that  close  and  keen  analytical  and  logical  po'+i:: 
combined  with  that  simplicity,  lucidity,  and  strength  of  st>'le  which  have  already  given  1  >■ 
Hodge  a  world-wide  reputation  as  a  controversialist  and  writer,  and  as  an  iuvestigatoi  . 
the  great  theological  problems  of  the  day. 

Single  copies  sent  post-paid  on  receipt  of  the  \rice. 

SCRIBNER,  ARMS  THONG  &  CO., 

G54:  Uroadway,  New  York 


BJL»£NBUHSH   REVIEW.  —  "  The  BEST  History  of  the  Boman  RepubUc." 
LONDON  TIMES. -"BY  FAR  THE  BEST  Histonr  of  the  DecUne  and  I'm! 
of  the  Roman  Commonwealth." 


THE 


iiisforg  of  Kome, 

FROM  THE  EARLIEST  TIME  TO  THE  PERIOD  OF  ITS  DECLINE. 

By  Dr.  THEODOR  MOMMSEN. 

{ranslated,  with  the  author's  sandlion  and  additions,  by  the  Rev.  W.  P.  Dickson,  Regiia 
Professor  of  Biblical  Criticism  in  the  University  of  Glasgow,  late  Classical  Examiner  it 
the  University  of  St.  Andrews.  With  an  lutroduftion  by  Dr.  Leonhard  Schmitz,  at<) 
a  copious  Index  of  the  whole  four  volumes,  prepared  especially  for  this  edition. 

REPRINTED  FROM  THE  REVISED   LONDON  EDITION 

IPour  Volumes  crown  8vo.  Price  per  volume,  $2.00. 


Dr.  MoMMSEN  has  long  been  known  and  appreciated  through  his  i  searches 
into  the  languages,  laws,  and  institutions  of  Ancient  Rome  and  Italy,  as 
the  most  thoroughly  versed  scholar  now  living  in  these  departments  of  his- 
torical investigation.  To  a  wonderfully  exa6l  and  exhaustive  knowledge  of 
these  subjects,  he  unites  great  powers  of  generalization,  a  vigorous,  spirited, 
and  exceedingly  grapliic  style  and  keen  analytical  powers,  which  give  this 
history  a  degree  of  interest  and  a  permanent  value  possessed  by  no  other 
record  of  the  decline  and  fall  of  the  Roman  Commonwealth.  "  Dr. 
Mommsen's  work,"  as  Dr.  Schmitz  remarks  in  the  introdu6tion,  "  though 
the  produ6lion  of  a  man  of  most  profound  and  extensive  learning  and 
knowledge  of  the  world,  is  not  as  much  designed  for  the  professional 
scholar  as  for  intelligent  readers  of  all  classes  who  take  an  interest  in  the  hLv 
tory  of  by-gone  ages,  and  are  inclined  there  to  seek  information  that  may 
guide  them  safely  through  the  perplexing  mazes  of  modern  history." 

CRITICAL  NOTICES. 

"  A.  work  of  the  very  highest  merit ;  its  learning  is  exa(ft  and  profound  ;  its  narrative  fiiD 
af  gcnias  and  skill  ;  its  descriptions  of  men  are  admirably  vivid.  We  wish  to  place  on 
iccord  our  opinion  that  Dr.  Mommsen's  is  by  far  the  best  history  of  the  Decline  and  Fajj 
of  the  Roman  Commonwealth." — London  Times. 

"  Since  the  days  of  Niebuhr,  no  work  on  Roman  History  has  appeared  that  combines  so 
much  to  attraA,  instruft,  and  charm  the  reader.  Its  style — a  rare  quality  in  a  German  au- 
thor— is  vigorous,  spirited,  and  animated.  Professor  Mommsen's  work  can  stand  a  com- 
parison with  the  noblest  produ(5lions  of  modem  history." — Dr.  Sckmitz. 

"  This  is  the  best  history  of  the  Roman  Republic,  taking  the  work  on  the  whole— the 
author's  complete  mastery  of  his  subjefl,  the  variety  of  his  gifts  and  acquirements,  hi* 
graphic  power  in  the  delineation  of  national  and  individual  charadler,  and  the  vivid  intern) 
vhich  he  inspires  in  every  portion  of  his  book.     He  is  without  an  equal  in  his  own  sphere." 

-Sdinbur^h  Revietu. 
'  K  «x)i)k  of  deepest  interest"  — /l^<7n  Trench, 


ANOTHER  GREAT  HISTORICAL  WORK. 


F 


FFFfF, 


By  Prof.  Dr.  ERNST  CHRTins. 


Translated  by  ADOLPHUS  WILLIAM  WARD,  M.A.,  Fellow  of  St.  Peter's 
College,  Cambridge,  Prof,  of  History  in  Owen's  College,  Manchester. 

To  be  completed  in  four  or  five  vols.,  crown  8vo,  at  $2.50  per  voliimei. 

Printed  UPON  Tinted  Paper,  Uniform  with  Mommsen's  History  of  Rome,  and  xiia 
Library  Edition  of  Froude's  History  of  England. 

VOLS.    I.,  II.,  III.,   AND   IV.,    NOW   READY.. 


Curtius'  History  of  Greece  is  similar  in  plan  and  purpose  to  Mommsen's  History  of 
Rome,  with  which  it  deserves  to  rank  in  every  respect  as  one  of  the  great  masterpieces  of 
historical  literature.  Avoiding  the  minute  details  which  overburden  other  similar  works, 
it  groups  together  in  a  very  picturesque  manner  all  the  important  events  in  the  history  o( 
this  kingdom,  which  has  exercised  such  a  wonderful  influence  upon  the  world's  civilization. 
The  narrative  of  Prof.  Curtius'  work  is  flowing  and  animated,  and  the  generalizations, 
although  bold,  are  philosophical  and  sound. 


CRITICAL  NOTICES. 


"  Professor  Curtius'  eminent  scholarship  is  a  sufficent  guarantee  for  the  trustwort+iiness  of 
his  histoiy,  while  the  skill  with  which  he  groups  his  facts,  and  his  effective  mode  of  narrating 
them.,  combine  to  render  it  no  less  readable  than  sound.  Professor  Curtius  everywhere  main- 
tains the  true  dignity  and  impartiality  of  history,  and  it  is  evident  his  sympathies  are  on 
the  side  of  justice,  humanity,  and  progress." — London  Athcmviini. 

"We  can  not  e.vpress  our  opinion  of  Dr.  Curtius'  book  better  than  by  s.aying  that  it  may 
be  fitly  ranked  with  Theodor  Mommsen's  great  work." — Loudon  Sficctator. 

"As  an  introduction  to  the  study  of  Grecian  history,  no  previous  work  is  comparable  to 
the  present  for  vivacity  and  picturesque  beauty,  while  in  sound  learning  and  accuracy  cf 
statement  it  is  not  inferior  to  the  elaborate  productions  which  enrich  the  literature  of  the 
age." — N.  Y.  Daily  Tribune. 

"The  History  of  Greece  is  treated  by  Dr.  Curtius  so  Ijroadly  and  freely  in  the  spirit  of 
the  nineteenth  century,  that  it  becomes  in  his  hands  one  of  the  worthiest  and  most  instruct.ve 
branches  of  study  for  all  who  desire  something  more  than  a  knowledge  of  isolated  fac'ts  foi 
tlieir  education.  This  translation  ought  to  become  a  regular  part  ol  the  accepted  course 
of  reading  for  joung  men  at  college,  and  for  all  who  are  in  training  for  the  free  pollticr\l 
life  of  our  country." — A*.  Y.  Evening  Post. 

This  book  sent  ^\>st-f aid,  upon  receipt  of  the  price,  by  the  Publishers, 


SCRIBNER,  ARMSTRONG  &  CO., 

654  Broadway,  New  York. 


PROSPECTUS 

OF  A 

t"  f  '■ 

IjjenlDgirfll  ^'j  jj)ilii0O{j!)irfll  lilinmj 

EDITED   BY 

HENRY  B,  SMITH,  D.D.,  and  PHILIP  SCHAFF,  D.D., 

Professors  in  the  Union  Theological  Seminary,  New  York. 
O 

The  undersigned  propose  to  ptibKsh  a  select  and  compact  Library  of  Text-Books  upon 
all  the  main  departments  of  Theology  and  Philosophy,  adapted  to  the  wants  especially  of 
ministers  and  students  in  all  denominations. 

Some  of  the  works  will  be  translated  from  the  German  and  other  languages  ;  others  will 
be  based  upon  treatises  by  various  authors  ;  some  will  be  written  for  the  Library  by  English 
or  American  scholars.  The  aim  will  be  to  furnish  at  least  one  condensed  standard  work  on 
each  of  the  scientific  divisions  of  Theology  and  Philosophy,  giving  the  result  of  the  best 
critical  investigations,  e.xcluding,  however,  such  histories  and  commentaries  as  extend 
through  many  volumes. 

This  scheme  is  not  presented'as  final,  but  as  indicating  the  aim  of  the  editors.  If  suffi- 
cient encouragement  be  given,  no  pains  will  be  spared  to  make  the  project  complete,  and 
'.hus  to  meet  a  qreat  and  acknowledged  desideratum  in  the  apparatus  for  study.  On  all 
these  topics  every  student  needs,  at  least,  one  g  ,od  work.  To  supply  this  will  be  the  aim 
of  our  Library. 

The  various  volumes  will  be  published  in  the  best  style,  on  reasonable  terms,  and  as 
rapidly  as  the  nature  of  the  work  and  the  encouragement  of  the  public  will  allow. 

The  editors  will  be  assisted  by  eminent  scholars  of  various  denominations,  who  will 
respectively  assume  the  literary  responsibility  for  the  volumes  prepared  by  themselves 
within  the  general  plan  and  aim  of  the  library. 


NOW  READY, 


C|^  Cjj^alogkal  attir  f  tjiloso)j|kal  ITibran. 
UEBERWEG'S  HISTORY  OF  PHILOSOPHY. 

Vol.  L — History  of  the  Ancient  and  Mediaeval  Philosophy.  By  Dr.  Fried  rich  Ueberweo 
Translated  from  the  fourth  German  edition  by  George  S.  Morris,  A.M.,  with-addition' 
by  Noah  Porter,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  President  of  Yale  College,  and  a  general  Introductiu;' 
by  the  editor  of  the  Philosophical  Library.     One  vol.  8vo.  cloth,  $3.50. 

Vol.  II. — History  of  Modern  l^hilosophy.     With  an  Ess.iy  on  English  Pliilosophy,  by 
Dr.  Noah  Porter,  President  of  Yale  College ;  and  on  Itali.in  Philosophy,  by  Pro- 
fessor V.  BoTTA.     One  vol.  8vo,  d  ith.     ^4.00. 
S'.tt;  pjst-paid,  upon  receipt  of  the  price  by  the  Publishers, 

SCRIBNER,  ARMSTRONG  &  CO., 

654  Broadway,  New  York, 


LANGE'S  COMMENTARY. 

NOW   READY: 

Edited  by  Rev.  Dr.  PHILIP  SCHAFF,  and  inchtding- 

HOSEA.— By  Otto  Schmoller,  Ph.  D.,  lated  and  enlarged  by  Charles  Elliott, 

Uracil,    Wurtemberg.     Translated,  with  D.D. 

additions,  by  James  E.  McCurdy.  MICAH.— By  Paul  Kleinkrt.    Trans- 

JOEL.— By    Otto    Schmollhr,  Ph.  D.  l^ted,   with    additions,    by   George    R. 

Translated,  with  additional   Notes  and  a  Bliss,  D-D. 

New  Version  of  the    Hebrew   Text,  by  NAHUM,  HABAKKUK,  AIJD  ZEPH- 

JoHN  Forsyth,  D.D.,  LL.D.  ANIAH.— By  Paul  Klei.nert.    Trans- 

AMOS.-By  Otto  Schmoller,  Ph.  D.  lated  and  enlarged  by  Ch.^rles  Elliott, 

Translated  and  enlarged  by  Talbot  W.  „.'r,^.-r      ^       ■,              ^      ,,   ^ 

Chambers,  D.D.  HAGGAI.— By    James     F.    McCurdy, 

Princeton,  N.  Y. 

OBADIAH  -By  Paul  Kleinert  of  Be,-  ZECHARIAH.-Bv  Talbot  W.  Cham- 

lin.  Transhated^ with  additions,  by  George  ^^^     ^.p     ^^^  York. 

R.  Bliss,  D.D.  ,,.,  .\„,,      „    ,            „                 „  _ 

MALACHI.— By  Joseph  Packard,  D.D. 

JONAH.— By  Paul  Kleinert.     Trans-  Alexandria,  Va. 

One  vol.  royal  8vo,  doth J5.00 


The  Vohtmes  previously  Published  are : 

OLD    TESTAMENT.  —  I.    GENE.SIS.      II.    JOSHUA,    JUDGES,   and    RUTH. 

III.  FIRST  and  SECOND  KINGS.  IV.  PSALMS.  V.  PROVERBS,  SONG 
OF  SOLOMON,  ECCLESIASTES.  VI.  JEREMIAH  and  LAMENTA- 
TIONS. 

NEW  TESTAMENT.  —  I.    MATTHEW.     II.   MARK  and  LUKE.     III.    JOHN. 

IV.  ACTS.  V.  THE  EPISTLE  OF  PAUL  TO  THE  ROMANS.  VI.  COR- 
INTHIANS. VII.  CALATIANS,  EPHESIANS,  PHILIPPIANS,  COLOS- 
SIANS.  VIII.  THESSALONIANS,  TIMOTHY.  TITUS,  PHILEMON,  and 
HEBREWS.  IX.  THE  EPIS'lLES  GENERAL  OF  JAMES,  PETER, 
JOHN,  and  JUDE. 

Each  one  vol.  8vo.      Price  per  vol.,  in  half  calf,  $7.50  ;    in  sheep,  $6.50  ;    in  cloth,  $5.00. 


NAMES  AND  DENOMINATIONS  OF  CONTRIBUTORS. 

W.  G.  T.  SHEDD,  D.D.,  Presbyterian.  E.  D.  YEOMANS,  D.D.,  Presbyterian. 

E.  A.  WASHBURNE,  D.D.,  Episcopal.  Rev.  C.  C.  STARBUCK,  Congregational. 

A.  C.  KENDRICK,  D.D.,  B.iptist.  J.  ISIDOR  MOMBERT,  D.D.,  Episcopal 

W.  H.  GREEN,  D.D.,  Presbyterian.  D.  W.  POOR,  D.D.,  Pre.sbyterian. 

J.  F.  HUR.ST,   D.D.,  Methodist.  C.  P.  WING,  D.D.,  Presbyterian. 

TAYLER  LEWIS,  LL.D.,  Dutch  Reformed.  GEORGE  E.  DAY.  D.D.,  Congregational. 

Ruv.  CH.  F.   SHAFFER,  D.D.,  Lutheran.  Rev.  P.  H.  .STEENSTRA,  Episcopal. 

R.  D.  HITCHCOCK,  D.D.,  Presbyterian.  A.  GOSMAN,  D.D.,  Presbyterian. 

K.  HARWOOD,  D.D.,  Episcopal.  Pkes.  CHAS.  A.  AIKEN,  D.D.,  Presbyt'n. 

H'.  H.  HACKETr,  D.D.,  Baptist.  M.  B.  RIDDLE,  D.D.,  Dutch  Reformed. 

JOHN  LILLIE,  D.D.,  Presbyterian.  Prof.  WM.  WELLS,  D.D.,  Methodist. 

Uev.  W.  G.  SUMNER,  Episcopal.  W.  H.  HORNBLOWER,  D.D.,  Presbyt'n 

Pnof.  CHARLES  ELLIOIT,  Presbyterian.  Prof.  GEORGE  BLISS,  Baptist. 

TliOS.  C.  CONANT,  D.D.,  Baptist.  T.  W.  CHAMBERS,  D.D.,  Reformed. 

iW  Each  volume  of  "LANGE=S  COMMENTARY"  is  complete  in  itself,  and  can  be 
[iuri_hased  separately.  Sent,  post-paid,  to  any  address  upon  receipt  of  the  price  ($5  pei 
volume)  by  the  publishers, 

SCRIBNER,  ARMSTRONG  &  CO., 

654  Broadw.w,  New  York. 


lanuals  of  IPoIifirel  ^ronorag, 

PUBLISHED    BY 

SCI?.IB]SrE]R,    ^IPllVISTROlSrG}-    &>    Co. 


Perry's  Elements  of  Political  Economy. 

Nh:\v  Edition,  Revised  by  the  Author. 

This  treatise  presents  views  favorable  to  the  utmost  freedom  of  com- 
merce, compatible  with  legitimate  revenue  from  tariff  taxes.  It  is  a 
standard  text-book  in  all  our  colleges  throughout  the  country.  By 
Arthur  Latham  Perry,  Professor  of  Political  Economy  and  History 
in  Williams  College.     i,'il  pages,  price  $2.50. 

"Your  book  interests  students  more  than  any  other  I  have  ever  instructed  from." — 
Pres.  T.  D.  Woolsey,  Yale  College. 

"  As  a  manual  for  general  reading  and  popular  instruction.  Prof.  Perry's  book  is  far 
superior  to  any  work  on  the  subject  before  issued  in  the  United  States." — N'.  V.  Times. 

"We  cordially  recommend  this  book  to  all,  of  whatever  school  of  political  economy, 
who  enjoy  candid  statement  and  full  and  logical  discussion." — N.  Y.  Nation. 

"There  is  more  common  sense  in  this  book  than  in  any  of  the  more  elaborate  works  on 
the  same  subject  that  have  preceded  it." — N.  Y.  IndeJ>ende>:t. 

"  In  all  the  portions  of  the  book  which  we  have  read,  the  author  shows  himself  to  be  a 
clear,  strong,  bold,  and  generally  sound  thinker." — Neiv  Knglander. 

Bowen's  American  Political  Economy. 

This  treatise  presents  views  compatible  with  the  idea  that  "  every  coun- 
try has  a  political  economy  of  its  own,  suitable  to  its  own  physical  circum- 
stances of  position  on  the  globe,  and  to  the  character,  habits,  and  institu- 
tions of  the  people."  By  Francis  Bowen,  Professor  of  Political 
Economy  and  Civil  Polity  in  Harvard  College.     495  pages.,  price  $2.50 

"  If  our  members  of  Congress  would  vote  themselves  a  copy  of  this  book,  and  read  it 
fewer  wild  sc.iemes  would  be  concocted  by  them,  and  a  great  saving  of  time  and  the 
people's  money  would  be  secured." — The  Philadeljihia  Age. 

"  His  arguments  are  worth  considering,  and  his  whole  book  is  of  high  value  to  any 
American  to  study  economical  questions." — Springfield  ReJ>ublican. 

"  A  solid  and  well-reasoned  treatise.  .  .  .  Mr.  Bowen's  views  are  clearly  stated 
and  thoroughly  reasoned." — Boston  Congregationalist. 

.  .  .  "There  are  hundreds  going  wrong  to-day  whom  a  careful  perusal  of  this  vol- 
ume would  set  right." — N'.   Y.  Daily  Tribune. 

K®^  Sent,  J>ost-paid,  on  receijit  of^rice  by  the  publishers. 


THE  BIBLE  COMMENTARY 

(rOI'ULARLY  KNOWN    IN   EiNGLAND   AS  "THE  SPEAKER'S  COAIMEKT.VUV -. 

A  Plain  Explanatory  Exposition  of  the  Holy 
Scriptures  for  every  Bible  Reader. 

J\)  be publiihed  at  regular  intervals,  in  royal  octavo  vohimes,  at  the  uiiUormpnr:  :>( 
$5.00  per  volume. 

WITH    OCCASIONAL   ILLUSTRATIONS. 

The  preat  object  of  the  BIBLE  COMMENTARY  is  to  put  every  general  reader  and  stn 
dent  in  full  possession  of  whatever  information  may  be  necessary  to  enable  him  to  unaerstand 
the  Holy  Scriptures ;  to  give  him,  as  far  as  possible,  the  same  advantages  as  the  SchoHr,  and 
to  sujiply  him  with  satisfactory  answers  to  objections  resting  upon  misrepresentations  oi 
misintoriirptations  of  the  text  To  secure  this  end  most  effectually,  the  Comment  Is  chiefly 
explanatory,  presenting  in  a  concise  and  readable  form  the  result*  of  learned  in\e.stifcaticns 
carried  on  diuniiR  the  last  half  century,  ^^^len  fuller  discussions  of  difTiciilt  jiassages  or  im 
portunt  subjects  arc  necessary,  they  are  placed  at  the  end  of  the  chapter  or  volume- 

The  text  is  reprinted  without  alteration,  from  the  Authorized  Ver.sionof  16U,  withmargina. 
references  and  renderings ;  but  the  notes  forming  this  Commentary  will  embody  amended 
translations  of  pas.-agos  proved  to  be  incorrect  in  that  version. 

The  work  will  be  divided  into  EIGHT  SECTIONS,  which  it  is  expected  will  be  compri.sed 
in  as  many  volumes,  and  each  volume  will  be  a  royal  octavo  Typographically,  special  pains 
has  been  taken  to  adapt  the  work  to  the  use  of  older  readers  and  students. 

N.B.— The  American  edition  of  the  Bible  Commentary  is  printed  fi'om  stereotype  plates, 
duplicated  from  those  upon  which  the  English  edition  is  printed,  and  it  is  fully  ecjual  tc 
that  in  every  respect- 


NOW    READY.— FOUR    VOLUMES. 
Section  I.— The  Pentateuch.  Section  II.— The  Historical  Books. 

GENESIS.— By    Rt.    Rev.    E.    Hakold  part  i, 

Browne,  D.D.  JOSHUA.— By  Rev.  T.  E.  EsriN,  P.D. 

EXODUS,  Chap.  I.-XIX.— By  The  Ed-  JUDGES,  RUTH,   SAMUEL —By  Rt. 

'™''-  Rev.  Lord  Arthur  Hervev,  M.A. 

EXODUS,  Chap^  XX    to  the   end.-By  firsT  KINGS.-By  Rev.  George  Raw- 

Rev.  Samuel  Clark,  M.A.  linson.  M.A. 

LEVITICUS. — By  Rev.  Samuel  Clark,  part  n. 

^'••'^-  SECOND  KINGS,  CHRONICLES,  EZ- 

NUMBERS   AND   DEUTERONOMY.  RA,    NEHEMIAH,     ESTHER.— By 

—By  Rev.  T.  E.  Espin,  B.D.  Rev.  George  Ravvlinson. 

Section  III.— The  Poetical  Books. 

JOB The  Editor. 

fVery  Rev.  G.  H.  S.  Johnson,  M.  A.,  author  oi  Sermons 
P'jALMS  J      Preached  in  l^e/ls  Cathedral. 

I  The  Editor. 

I  Rev.  C.  I.  Elliott,  M.A. 

f  Rev.  K.  H.  Plumptre,  M.A.,  author  of  Christ  arui  Chris- 
PROVERBS \      tend.^m  (Boyle  Lectures),  Sermons  on  Tlieology  and  Life, 

I      <5h,-..  <5.-v. 

ECCLESIASTES R;v   W.   I'.  Bullock,  M.A.,  Secretary  to  the  S.  P.  G. 

SONG  OF  SOLOMON. .      Rev.  T.  Kingsbury,  M.A.,  Trinity  College,  Cambridge. 

Each  volume  of  the  Speaker's  Commentary  is  complete  in  itself,  and  is  sold  separately 
Cloth,  $3.00;  sheep,  $6.50;  half  calf,  I7.50. 

SCRIBNER.  '\-M STRONG,  d  CO.,  654  Broadway.  N.  Y. 


THE  NOVEL  OF  THE  YEAR. 


ARTHUR  BONNICASTLE, 

By  Dr.  J.  G.  HOLLAND, 

Author  of  ^^ Bitter- Sweet,"  " Kathrlna,''''  "TitcornVs  Letters,"  <tc. 


YTLT^  TWELVE  FULL-PAGE  ILLUSTRATIONS  BY 
MARY  A.  HALLOOK. 


One    Vol.    12mo,    $1.7B 

AHTmXR  BoNNlCASTLE  is  the  most  mature  and  finished  prose  work 
of  its  popular  author.  Autobiographic  in  form,  it  is  partly  so  in  mateiia] 
likewise ;  and  while  of  thrUling  interest  as  a  story,  it  presents  the  ripe 
results  of  a  life  of  earnest  action  and  thought.  The  great  lesson  of  the 
book  is  self-respect  and  self-reliance — the  evil  influence  of  dependence 
being  exemplified  in  different  characters  and  circumstances,  by  the  youth 
of  Arthur  and  the  life  of  Peter  Mullens.  For  character-drawing,  purpose, 
pathos,  style  and  savor  of  the  soil,  ARTHUR  BONNICASTLE  is  remark- 
able among  the  novels  of  the  time. 


DR.    HOLLAND'S    T^ORKS. 

Each  in  One  Volume  IBmo. 


•BITTER-SWEET;  a  Poem     . 

♦KATHRINA  ;  a  Poem     . 

♦LETTERS  TO  YOUNG  PEOPLE, 

GOLD-FOIL,  hammered  from  Pop- 
ular Proverbs 

♦LESSONS  IN  LIFE 

♦PLAIN  TALKS  on  FamiUar  Sub- 
jects       

LETTilRS  TO  THE  JONESES 


$1  50 
1  60 
1  50 

1  75 
1  75 

1  75 

1  75 


$2  00 

2  no 

I   50 


MISS  GILBERT'S  CAREER    . 

BAY  PATH 

THE  MARBLE  PROPHECY,  and 
ether  Poems 

GARNERED  SHEAVES,  Complete 
Poetical  Works,  "  Bitter-Sweet," 
"  Kathrina,"  ' '  Marble  Phrophecy, " 
red  line  edition,  beautifully  illus- 
trated  4  00 


*  Thepe  six  volumes  are  ieeued  in  Cabinet  siM  (16ino),  "Brightwood  Edition,"  at  the 
same  prices  an  above. 


Prices  and  Styles  of  the  Different  Editions      ! 

OF 

FROUDE'S  HISTORY  OF  ENGLAND. 


In  halt  roan,  gilt  top,  per  set  of  twelve  vols.  lamo $31  oo 

Elegance  an<l  cheapness  are  combinej  in  a  remarkable  degree  in  this  edition.  It  take* 
•t«  name  Irom  the  place  of  Mr.  Froude's  residence  in  London,  also  famous  as  the  hoDii 
oJ  Thomas  Carlyle. 

In  cloth,  at  the  rate  of  $1.25  per  volume.    The  set  (12  vols.),  in  a  neat  box. $15.00 
The  Same,  in  half  calf  extra 36.00 

This  edition  is  printed  from  the  same  plates  as  the  other  editions,  and  on  firm,  white 
paper.  It  is,  without  exception,  the  cheapest  set  of  books  of  its  class  ever  issued  in  thi« 
country. 

In  twelve  vols,  crown  8vo,  cloth $30.00 

The  Same,  in  half  calf  extra 50.00 

The  Edition  is  printed  on  laid  and  tinted  paper,  at  the  Riverside  Press,  and  is  in  every 
respect  worthy  a  place  in  the  most  carefully  selected  library. 

SHORT  STUDIES  ON  GREAT  SUBJECTS. 

Bv  James  Anthony  Froude,  M.A., 

"  History  0/ Enghiiid"  "  The  English  in  Irelaitd  during 
the  JCighteenih  Century,"  etc. 

POPULAR  EDITION.     Two  vols.  i2mo,  cloth,  $1.50  per  vol.     The  Set . . .  .$3.00 
CHELSEA   EDITION.     Two  vols,  izmo,  half  roan,  gilt  top,  $2.00  per  vol- 
ume.    Per  Set 4,00 

The  Complete  Worlds  of  James  Anthony 
Froude,  M.A. 

HISTORY    OF    ENGLAND    AND    SHORT    STUDIES. 
Fourteen   vols.,   in   a   neat   Box, 

HOPULAR   EDITION . .  $i8.t» 

CHELSEA    EDITION aj.a 

Tht  oicve  works  sent,  post-paid,  by  the  publishers,  on  receipt  of  J.i« 

SCRIBNER,  ARMSTRONG  &  CO., 

6^4  Bko^ujway,  New  Yo?- 


Popular  and  Standard  f  okks 


PUBLISHED  BY 


654z  Broadivay,  Weiv   Yorh, 
IlSr   1873. 


1.  BAGEHOT'S  (W.)  LOimARD  STREET.     12mo |1  76 

2.  BIBLE  COMMENTARY.     Vol.11.     8vo 5  00 

.3.         "                          "                    Vol.  III.     Svo 5  00 

4.  COOK'S  (F.  C.)  EXODUS.    Svo : 1  50 

5.  DIEULAFAIT'S   (L.)  DIAMONDS  AND  PRECIOUS  STONES.    Tlluatrated. 

12mo 2  0" 

6.  DODGE'S  (MRS.  MARY  MAPES)  HANS  BRINKER.     niustrated.     12mo.  1  50 

7.  FIELD'S  (T.  W.)  INDIAN  BIBLIOGRAPHY.     Svo 5  PO 

8.  FISHER'S   (DR.  G.  P.)  HISTORY  OP  THE  REFORMATION.     Svo  .3  CO 

9.  GUYOT'S  (PROF.  A.)  PHYSICAL  GEOGRAPHY.     Large  4to 2  25 

10.  HALL'S  (F.)  MODERN  ENGLISH.     12mo 2  50 

11.  "              "    FALSE  PHILOLOGY.     12mo,  boards 125 

12.  HOLLAND'S  (DR.  J.  G.)  ARTHUR  BONNICASTLE.     Illustrated.    ]2mo..  1  75 
1.3.  HOPKINS'   (DR.  M.)  OUTLINE  STUDY  OF  MAN.     12mo 1  75 

THE  ILLUSTRA'TED  LIBRARY  OF  TRAVEL  AND  ADVENTURE. 

Each  1  vul.  ISjiiu  cloth. . . -. 1  50 

1 !.  Central  Africa.  15.  Siam  as  It  Was  and  Is. 

THE  LIBRARY  OF  CHOICE  FICTION: 

10.  The  Burgomaster's  Family.    Svo.     Cloth,  $1.50;  paper 1  00 

17.  Wandering  Willie.    Svo.     Paper  SO 

18.  Galama.    tjvo.     Cloth,  $1.25;  pajier 75 

19.  May.     By  Mks.  Oliphant.    Svo.     Cloth,  §1.60;  paper 100 

£0.  LYNDON'S   OXLEY.     A  Novel.     12aio 150 

21.  MEDHURST'S   (W.  H.)  THE  FOREIGNER  IN  PAR  CATHAY.     12mo....  1  50 

22.  FERITY'S    (PROF.   A.   L.)  POLITICAL  ECONOMY.     Wtli  edition  revised. 

Cro-.vn  Svo 2  50 

23.  SAXE  HOLM'S  STORIES.     12mo,  extra  gilt,  $1.75 ;  plain 1  50 

24.  STANLEY'S   (H.  M.)  MY  KALULU.     Illu.itrated.    12mo 2  00 

£5.  UEBERWEG'S  (PROF.  F.)  HISTORY  OP  PHILOSOPHY.    Vol.  IL    Svo..  4  00 

26.  VERNE'S    (JULES)  FROM  THE   EARTH    TO   THE   MOON,     niustrated. 

Crown  Svo 3  00 

27.  VERNE'S    (JULES)    JOURNEY    TO    THE    CENTRE    OP    THE    EARTH. 

luuHtrated.     12mo 2  00 

28.  VERY  YOUNG  COUPLE  (A).  12mo 1  25 

*jf*  Anu  of  the  above  boolcn  sent  postpaid  to  any  address  upon  receipt  of  the  price  by 
"le  publishers. 


Date  Due 


Pnncelon  Theological  Seminary-Spi 


1    1012  01007  5176 


^ 

1 

f^^^ 

1 

i... 

..i»i 

